Page 1









E | August / September 2011


SECURITY 10 Years After 9/11

Biometrics In Airport Access Control Checkpoint Technology Changes Life After PATCO




ith this issue of Airport Magazine, we are pleased to announce two new corporate members of the magazine’s 2011-2012 Editorial Advisory Board. We welcome Charles Lamb, C.M., president, Delta Airport Consultants Inc. of Richmond, Va., and Ramon Ricondo, president, Ricondo & Associates Inc., of Chicago. They will offer suggestions and advice on appropriate articles and projects for the magazine. Other corporate members on the advisory board are: Bill Hogan, vice president-aviation, RS&H; Stacy Hollowell, senior marketing manager, Siemens Corp.; Randy Pope, associate vice president, aviation and facilities, Burns & McDonnell; and Laura Samuels, vice president, corporate communications, Hudson Group. Advertisers in this issue are: ASSA, Inc.; Astronics DME Corp.; Atkins; Axis Communications Inc.; Burns & McDonnell; C. Kell-Smith & Associates, Inc.; Delta Airport Consultants, Inc.; Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.; Michael Baker Corp.; Oshkosh Corp.; Rapiscan Systems, Inc.; Ricondo & Associates, Inc.; RS&H; Siemens; and Whispertrak LLC. These companies help to make our magazine possible, and we ask that you will support them in turn. For our October/November issue, Airport Magazine will address Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting, with features on ARFF’s responsibility in airfield safety, implementing an effective Safety Management System and when to buy a refurbished ARFF vehicle, among other articles.

Barbara Cook Airport Magazine is pleased to offer our readers QR (quick response) codes, beginning with this issue. The two codes listed here will allow you to access AAAE’s site and to view a video that demonstrates our ANTN Digicast training system, currently in use at 132 airports. To open the QR codes, you’ll need to download a QR reader from your app store to your smartphone or tablet. Then, just scan the QR code to view the information available through it. More QR codes will be published by Airport Magazine in the coming months to link you to news and product information.
















601 Madison Street, Suite 400 Alexandria, VA 22314 (703) 824-0500, Ext. 133 Fax: (703) 820-1395 Internet Address: Send editorial materials/press releases to: Airport Magazine is published bimonthly by the AAAE Service Corporation Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the American Association of Airport Executives, and the Airport Research and Development Foundation. Subscription price for AAAE members is included in the annual dues. U.S. subscription rate to non-members is $50 for one year. International rate for non-members is $100. Single copy price is $12. Copyright 2011 by AAAE. All rights reserved. Statements of fact and opinion are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of AAAE or any of its members or officers. POSTMASTER Send address changes to: Airport Magazine 601 Madison Street, Suite 400 Alexandria, VA 22314




Volume 23/Number 4 | August/September 2011 M








Focus on Security Features 12 〉〉 10 Years Post 9/11: What Will or Should the Next Decade Hold for Airports? TSA is Shifting to a Risk-based Approach…but There’s a Long Way to Go


16 〉〉 Checkpoint Technology Changes Pose Challenges For Airports Balancing Competing Needs

20 〉〉 Ten Years After…a General Aviation Retrospective The New Normal

22 〉〉 The TSC Clearinghouse Past, Present and Future


25 〉〉 Lambert-St. Louis International: Noise Complaint Resolution A Dramatic Decrease in Complaints

26 〉〉 From PATCO to Airport Management Airport Executives Remember the Transition

32 〉〉 Little Rock National Airport’s 2020 Vision Plan: Cleared for Takeoff


A Major Overhaul Begins


36 〉〉 Biometrics in Airport Access Control: Looking to the Future The Evolution of Biometrics

Coming in Airport Magazine

Departments Upfront 6 News Briefs 8 AirporTech 40 Finance Column 42 GA 44 FBR 46 Retail Briefs 48 MarketScan 50 Billboard 52 Ad Index EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD AIRPORT MEMBERS WILLIAM G. BARKHAUER, A.A.E., Morristown, New Jersey TIMOTHY M. DOLL, A.A.E., Eugene, Oregon MARK E. GALE, A.A.E, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ERIN O’DONNELL, Chicago, Illinois LYNN KUSY, C.M., Mesa, Arizona STEVE SCHREIBER, Portland, Oregon TODD MCNAMEE, A.A.E., Camarillo, California TORRANCE A. RICHARDSON, A.A.E., Fort Wayne, Indiana ROBERT OLISLAGERS, A.A.E., Englewood, Colorado LOUIS MILLER, Atlanta, Georgia AL POLLARD, A.A.E., Baltimore, Maryland C O R P O R AT E M E M B E R S BILL HOGAN, RS&H STACY HOLLOWELL, Siemens One, Inc. CHARLES LAMB, C.M., Delta Airport Consultants Inc. RANDY POPE, Burns & McDonnell RAMON RICONDO, Ricondo & Associates Inc. LAURA SAMUELS, Hudson Group


October/November ARFF (Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting) Issue The regulatory, operational and equipment needs of airport emergency services are highlighted in this annual update.

December/January Architecture and Engineering Issue A/E firms discuss successful and emerging strategies to achieve airport sustainability and meet operational efficiency goals.


PHILLIP E. JOHNSON, Grand Rapids, Michigan MARK D. KRANENBURG, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma WILLIAM F. MARRISON, Knoxville, Tennessee TODD L. MCNAMEE, Camarillo, California CARL D. NEWMAN, Phoenix, Arizona THOMAS M. RAFTER, Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey TORRANCE A. RICHARDSON, Fort Wayne, Indiana WALTER B. STRONG, Norman, Oklahoma ALVIN L. STUART, Salt Lake City, Utah PAUL J. WIEDEFELD, Baltimore, Maryland

KEVIN A. DILLON, Warwick, Rhode Island THOMAS E. GREER, Monterey, California GARY L. JOHNSON, Stillwater, Oklahoma JAMES A. KOSLOSKY, Grand Rapids, Michigan LYNN F. KUSY, Mesa, Arizona RONALD MATHIEU, Little Rock, Arkansas ERIN M. O’DONNELL, Chicago, Illinois BRADLEY D. PENROD, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ELAINE ROBERTS, Columbus, Ohio




MICHAEL J. LANDGUTH, Chattanooga, Tennessee


BRIAN D. RYKS, Duluth, Minnesota


SCOTT C. MALTA, Atwater, California

CHARLES M. BARCLAY, Alexandria, Virginia

BOARD MEMBERS DANETTE M. BEWLEY, Reno, Nevada SCOTT A. BROCKMAN, Memphis, Tennessee MARY CASE, Houston, Texas ANN B. CROOK, Horseheads, New York ROD A. DINGER, Redding, California TIMOTHY M. DOLL, Eugene, Oregon MARK E. GALE, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania STACY L. HOLLOWELL, Carrollton, Texas CLAUDIA B. HOLLIWAY, Valdosta, Georgia KIM W. HOPPER, Portsmouth, New Hampshire

TODD S. WOODARD, Spokane, Washington


JEFFREY A. MULDER, Tulsa, Oklahoma REBECCA L. HUPP, Bangor, Maine

POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE BONNIE A. ALLIN, Tucson, Arizona ROSEMARIE ANDOLINO, Chicago, Illinois WILLIAM G. BARKHAUER, Morristown, New Jersey KRYS T. BART, Reno, Nevada THELLA F. BOWENS, San Diego, California LARRY D. COX, Memphis, Tennessee ALFONSO DENSON, Birmingham, Alabama

STEVEN H. SCHREIBER, Portland, Oregon RICKY D. SMITH, Cleveland, Ohio SUSAN M. STEVENS, Charleston, South Carolina MARK VANLOH, Kansas City, Missouri

the runway. the anxiety in your head.

clear it all.

Oshkosh Airport Products builds some of the most advanced snow removal vehicles on the planet. Designed with industry-first technologies like Command Zone™ electronics and Oshkosh ALL STEER®, you can plow through the snow, the ice, and the headaches like never before – with peace of mind to spare.


AIT Screening Machines To Be Upgraded TSA’s plan to remove passengerspecific images on its millimeter wave Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) screening machines at U.S. airports and replace them with the generic outline of a person will take place over the coming months. New Automated Target Recognition software that will auto-detect items that could pose a potential threat using a generic outline of a person will be installed on all millimeter wave AIT units currently in airports, with plans to test similar software for backscatter units in the fall, TSA said. Currently, 500 imaging technology units, including millimeter wave and backscatter units, are in use at 78 airports nationwide, with additional units planned for deployment this year. By eliminating the image of an actual passenger and replacing it with a generic outline of a person,

passengers will be able to view the same outline that the TSA officer sees, according to the agency. Further, a separate TSA officer no longer will be required to view the image in a remotely located viewing room. In addition to further enhancing privacy protections, this new software will increase the efficiency of the screening process and expand the throughput capability of AIT, TSA said. As with the current version of AIT, if a potential threat is detected on the generic outline, the passenger will require additional screening. If no potential threats are detected, an “OK” appears on the monitor with no outline, and the passenger is cleared, TSA said. The agency worked with the DHS Science and Technology Directorate and private industry to develop the new software. In February 2011, TSA successfully tested the new software at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International, Las Vegas McCarran International and Reagan

Washington National airports.

TSA To Test Expedited Screening Process TSA announced that it will launch a pilot program at four airports this fall that will provide certain passengers with expedited security screening. TSA Administrator John Pistole said that certain Delta frequent flyers and certain members of Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) Trusted Traveler program, including members of Global Entry, SENTRI, and NEXUS, who are U.S. citizens and who also are flying on Delta will be eligible to participate in the pilot at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International and Detroit Metro airports. At Miami International and Dallas-Fort Worth International airports, certain frequent flyers from American and certain members of CBP’s Trusted Traveler programs who are U.S. citizens and who

Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport is celebrating the Sept. 1 opening of its new $20 million concourse, which adds 11 gates for regional jets with room for a 12th gate. The expansion marked the single largest improvement to the airport since it opened in November 1998. The new area encompasses 54,192 square feet, more than double the amount of public space in the original terminal, and includes the state’s first moving walkway. “This new addition is a game changer,” stated Philip Taldo, chairman of the airport’s board of directors. Airport Director and AAAE Chair Kelly Johnson, A.A.E., agreed. “For the first time we have looked for ways to identify the region by developing a sense of place,” she explained. “I believe the public will enjoy the feel of the new concourse, but we are not stopping there.” In addition to the new concourse, the airport’s entire concession program is undergoing a change. The Paradies Shops was selected to build out and operate two new CNBC stores, as well as four food and beverage locations.



Photo: Beth Hall

Northwest Arkansas Regional Opens New Concourse


also are flying on American will be eligible. TSA plans to expand this pilot to include United, Southwest, JetBlue, US Airways, Alaska Airlines, and Hawaiian Airlines, as well as additional airports, once operationally ready, according to Pistole. TSA will work with CBP and the airlines to determine passenger eligibility for this screening pilot, which is limited to U.S. citizens and is voluntary, Pistole said. All passengers in this pilot are subject to recurrent security checks and random screening. This pilot initiative will help clarify TSA’s next steps as the agency considers future riskbased, intelligence-driven security measures that would enable travelers to volunteer more information about themselves prior to flying, Pistole said. He reiterated that TSA will continue to incorporate random and unpredictable security measures throughout the airports and no individual will be guaranteed expedited screening.

Los Angeles To Repay United For Baggage Cost The Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners has approved a $40 million reimbursement agreement with United for design and construction costs associated with an inline checked baggage inspection system (CBIS) project in terminals 7 and 8 at Los Angeles International. The project will improve and automate security screening of checked baggage and will make traveling through terminals 7 and 8 safer, faster and more convenient, according to an announcement. The agreement allows for transfer of TSA funds through Los Angeles

World Airports (LAWA) to United for approved costs associated with the design and construction of the system. This action follows a 2003 Memorandum of Agreement, in which TSA committed to reimburse LAWA up to 75 percent of costs related to inline CBIS projects at Los Angeles International and LA/ Ontario International airports.

FAA Selects Brunswick Airport For MAP FAA announced that it has selected Brunswick (Maine) Executive as the newest airport to participate in the 2011 Military Airport Program (MAP), which uses federal funds to convert former military airports to civilian or joint-use airports. The MAP provides capital development funding assistance to civil airport sponsors of designated current joint-use military airfields or former military airports. These airports must be in FAA’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems. Airports included in the MAP may obtain discretionary funds for airport development, including certain projects not normally eligible for AIP assistance.

AAAE Cites Cost, Timing Issues With Draft SMS Rule A draft FAA proposal requiring certificated airports to implement Safety Management Systems (SMS) would burden airports with significant unfunded mandates and impose unrealistic deadlines, according to AAAE in comments filed with the agency. AAAE requested that FAA propose a supplemental draft rule that addresses concerns raised by airports and the association. In its comments, AAAE emphasized that, while the association and its members

support implementing measures to improve airport safety, the draft rule — Safety Management Systems for Certificated Airports — includes several counter-productive provisions. The association noted that the proposed rule would impose high costs on airports without identifying a funding source for the new program. AAAE cited the example of one large hub where implementation of the proposed SMS rule would cost $400,000 at the outset and then $500,000 per year in staffing and implementation for the airport and its tenants — costs that airports can’t afford to absorb in the current economic climate. Additionally, AAAE highlighted the burden that the proposed SMS rule would have on smaller airports, many of which lack necessary staff resources to undertake additional requirements. Proposed requirements, including managing hazard documentation, analysis, mitigation and tracking, would most likely fall to airport managers to handle on top of existing duties, adding to an already difficult and complicated environment at smaller facilities. AAAE also noted that the proposed rule’s inclusion of nonmovement areas is a significant expansion of Part 139’s scope. Airport non-movement areas include many tenant-controlled facilities, such as fuel farms, fixedbase operators and baggage handling areas. Under the draft rule, the airport would have to control these users to ensure compliance with SMS. AAAE said it does not support mandatory implementation of SMS in non-movement areas because of this unprecedented expansion of FAA’s regulatory scope. Airport executives also believe that any SMS rulemaking should include a phased implementation. Others with experience in SMS programs, including the



UPFRONT News Briefs Rochelle Cameron has been appointed deputy director of aviation, finance and administration at Philadelphia International Airport. Cameron replaces Edward Anastasi, who retired after 33 years in the airport’s finance unit. Cameron comes to Philadelphia International from the Metropolitan Washington (D.C.) Airports Authority.… Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority (MNAA) named Rob Wigington executive vice president and chief operating officer. Wigington replaces Monty Burgess, who retired in June. Wigington oversees MNAA’s operations, maintenance, public safety, community affairs and customer service, finance, purchasing, treasury, accounting, information technology, MNAA Properties Corporation, business development, continuous improvement, properties, and planning, design and construction departments.… Sheila Etelamaki has joined the Naples (Fla.) Airport Authority as director of finance and administration. She is responsible for the budget, accounting, risk management and general administrative functions for the 60 employees at Naples Municipal Airport.… The Hillsborough County (Fla.) Aviation Authority selected George Williams, previously human resources director of Hillsborough County, to operate and oversee the airport’s human resources needs.… Gresham, Smith and Partners (GS&P) has been selected to develop a guidebook for the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) entitled “Guidance for Treatment of Deicing-Impacted Airport Stormwater.” The guidebook will serve as a resource for airports, airlines and regulators and help them select and implement deicer treatment systems that balance compliance risk, cost, and airport operational impacts.… John Cugasi has joined The Paradies Shops’ executive leadership team as senior vice president. Cugasi previously served as vice president of airports for Caruso Affiliated, a Los Angeles-based retail and real estate development company; as director of concessions at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International; and as vice president for retail concepts at HMSHost.… George Walton has been named area manager of the Orlando office of Parsons Brinckerhoff. In his new role, Walton will oversee Parsons Brinckerhoff’s operations in central and north Florida.… Carol Hobbs has been named communications director for Atkins’ North America region. In this role, she will be responsible for all branding, advertising, media relations, and internal and external communications. 8

International Civil Aviation Organization, recommend phased implementation for SMS components and elements. AAAE voiced concern that the draft rule’s proposed six-month implementation for larger airports and nine-month implementation for smaller airports is overly aggressive to achieve the desired results. AAAE stated that a final rule should not be issued until Congress completes action on liability protection for the accountable executive and data/recordkeeping protection provisions — both of which the association is working to include in pending FAA reauthorization legislation.

FAA, NATCA Agree On Fatigue Recommendations FAA and the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) have reported agreement on fatigue recommendations that were developed by a joint FAA-NATCA working group. “The American public must have confidence that our nation’s air traffic controllers are rested and ready to work,” said DOT Secretary Ray LaHood. The agreement reinforces existing FAA policy that prohibits air traffic controllers from sleeping while they are performing assigned duties. FAA and NATCA also agreed that all air traffic controllers must report for work well-rested and mentally alert. As a result of this agreement, air traffic controllers can request to take leave, if they are too fatigued to work air traffic. FAA said it will develop a fatigue risk management system for air traffic operations by January 2012 that will collect and analyze data associated with work schedules, including work intensity, to ensure that the schedules are


not increasing the possibility of fatigue. Additionally, the agency is designing a comprehensive fatigue awareness and education training program for employees.

ACRP Issues Guide For Property Development The Transportation Research Board’s Airport Cooperative Research Program in May published a reference book for developing and leasing airport property that summarizes best practices from the perspective of the airport sponsor. Report 47: Guidebook for Developing and Leasing Airport Property includes a diverse set of case studies that show several approaches airports have taken to develop and lease property for both aeronautical and non-aeronautical uses. The research project that produced the guidebook also created two presentation templates designed to help airports in effective stakeholder communication regarding developing and leasing airport property. The templates, designed for a non-technical audience, provide content, examples and definitions for a presentation to community stakeholders. The templates, one for aeronautical use development (such as aircraft maintenance facilities, fixed-base operator facilities, hangars, training centers and cargo facilities) and nonaeronautical uses (including light industrial and commercial facilities) are available online. The guidebook notes that: •

Third-party development, innovative financing and taxexempt debt structure provided by private-sector entities, along with numerous local and state incentives, are just a few of the variables that make a blackand-white airport leasing policy


NIERMAN SCULPTURE: Internationally recognized Mexican artist Leonardo Nierman has donated an original sculpture to be displayed at Lambert-St. Louis International. The 10-foot-high, polished steel sculpture is entitled “Sensación de Vuelo” (Flying Sensation). Nierman has paintings, sculptures and tapestries in collections around the world, including The Museum of Modern Art in Mexico, The Gallery of Modern Art in New York, The Vatican Museum in Rome and The Museum of Contemporary Arts in Madrid. The Hon. Jacob Prado, the Mexican consul in Kansas City, Mo., offered the city of St. Louis the opportunity to receive the sculpture as a gift to represent the friendship between the Mexican and U.S. governments, as well as a tribute to Mexico’s centennial celebration of the Mexican Revolution of 1910. The exact location for the sculpture’s installation at the airport will be determined at a later date, pending a review by the airport’s art advisory committee. This is the first major art donation to be received under the airport’s new art and culture project, which was launched in 2010.

inadequate and outdated. • Airport management and potential tenants need to understand the key aspects of commercial property development and business agreements, and a publicsector entity may respond differently to risk than a private-sector entity. Publicsector organizations that own/ operate airports also may have different motivations to develop and could enter the negotiation from very different perspectives. Further, a development opportunity that might be appropriate for one airport might be completely unacceptable to another because of tenant mix, community goals, environmental sensitivities, or for one of many other variables. •

A general checklist of items is included that should be considered in the project

development analysis (applicable to new or redevelopment projects) and when structuring a lease agreement (applicable to all airport lease agreements). The checklists should be used to prepare the airport sponsor for negotiations by stimulating the thought process and considering the long-term implications of a proposed airport development. The checklists also may be used to prepare for community discussion or to prompt further research. Ten detailed case study projects that present a cross section of U.S. airports to provide examples of best management practices for leasing and development agreements are outlined in the guidebook. Airports represented with case studies are: Collin County (Texas) Regional, Monroe County (Ind.), Coastal Carolina (N.C.) Regional, New Bedford (Mass.) Regional,

Albany (N.Y.) International, Baton Rouge (La.) Metropolitan, Pittsburgh International, Ted Stevens Anchorage International, Houston Intercontinental and Tampa International. For information on the guidebook, go to onlinepubs/acrp/acrp_rpt_047.pdf.

Delta On Schedule With JFK Terminal 4 Expansion Delta is on schedule with the $1.2 billion expansion of Terminal 4 at New York’s Kennedy International where the structural steel frame of the Concourse B extension is now visible. Ahead of the 2013 opening, a virtual tour of the expanded terminal is available through a new animated video, accessible on the Delta Air Lines YouTube channel at http:// In addition, more than 80 displays throughout JFK terminals 2, 3 and 4 and on airport vehicles display the changes customers will experience in 2013. The Concourse B extension will include one of the largest Sky Clubs in the Delta system, as well as nine new international gates, for a total of 16 that the airline will occupy.

Aviation Issues On Safety Board’s ‘Most Wanted’ List The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) announced its new “Most Wanted” list of critical transportation issues that the board said need to be addressed to improve safety and save lives. Aviation issues on the list are: promote pilot and air traffic controller professionalism; address human fatigue; improve general aviation safety; require safety management systems (SMS); improve runway safety; and require image and onboard data recorders.




The 9/11 memorial at the former World Trade Center site memorializes the names of the victims of the tragedy. 12



ost adults vividly remember where they were on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. In reflecting upon the last decade since that horrific day, there have been many changes in the landscape of commercial aviation security. The degree of these changes, however, may not be to the extent you might expect, given the circumstances and the advancements in many other fields such as medical technology. Rapid

advancement has not occurred in aviation security. Some changes have been forward thinking and others have been brutally painful and slow in coming. It has taken a decade for TSA to meld into the organization it is today. TSA is slowly shifting to focus on a risk-based approach, looking for bad people rather than a complete focus on looking for bad things, but there is still a long way to go. The people who want to harm the United States are in this for the long haul and are very patient. We tend to have shorter planning and attention spans, which is a situation we need to change. There are three major areas in particular that TSA and airports have had to deal with over the last decade, and where thinking may not have been long term.

1. PASSENGER SCREENING In terms of passenger screening, we still have a long way to go. If you compare cell phone technology to checkpoint technology, it makes you wonder what happened. The cell phone — literally the size and weight of a brick in the early 1990s — only could make or receive a call, and that was if you were in a good cell zone and maybe standing on your desk with your right arm in the air. Today our phones for the most part work everywhere and provide instant access to about anything we could possibly need: GPS, purchases, information, comparison-shopping within a 10-mile radius and more. When we consider the passenger-screening checkpoint, it does not differ much from its inception in 1970. We do have some advanced technology. Yet, the main components of X-ray and walkthrough metal detectors are only a few versions newer than the original technology. The equipment that has been added has caused all kinds of consternation with the traveling public and still doesn’t meet the high-risk passenger physical screening required today.

2. AIRPORT SECURITY The various access control security systems, including CCTV, perimeter technology, alarm systems, radios and motion detectors, that airports have acquired to meet the challenges of the post9/11 airport environment, although valuable, in many cases require a virtual Houdini to manage. The various systems in a communications or security operations center are in many cases not integrated and require that an operator be able to successfully multitask to make proper use of multiple systems. Employee credentialing is an area that the airAIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011


port community continues to improve upon. In the early 1990s, airports went from typed and laminated ID badges with Polaroid pictures to badges that control access electronically. Some use a biometric credential. We then moved to conducting Criminal History Records Checks and Security Threat Assessments on employees. This has served us well and prevented people with disqualifying felonies who could pose a threat to aviation from obtaining a badge at commercial service airports. But we need to take it a step further and ensure that the person who was fingerprinted for the background check is the same person to whom the credential is issued and the same person using the badge when passing through a secure access point. The airport community, along with AAAE, has teamed and formed the Biometric Airport Security Identification Consortium (BASIC) to address these issues. The intent of BASIC is to take the existing airport credentialing infrastructure and develop a biometric credentialing environment. Thus far, BASIC has been successful in proving various methods to achieve that goal. BASIC has been active since 2008 and will provide viable roadmaps for all airports that eventually will be asked or mandated by TSA to participate in biometric credentialing. BASIC airports do not want to repeat the experience of decades ago when access control requirements were promulgated from the Aviation and Security Improvement Act of 1990. The act required airports to procure and install access control systems that could be electronically controlled and, in many cases, had to be replaced a few years later. Most of the technology that existed at the time was not fully viable for an airport environment with all of its operational constraints. BASIC is trying to help airports avoid this kind of unrealistic regulatory requirement in the future by proving that it can be done without the government completely defining the process for us. BASIC does follow federal credentialing guidelines that are used in the credentialing of government employees.

3. HUMAN FACTORS Currently, not much is being done to better understand human factors. TSA has the Behavior Detection Officer (BDO) program, but, frankly, that is one of the last lines of defense and is focused on hostile intent and not the average passenger. We really need to better understand the human factors part of the equation. TSA has implemented many procedures for passengers with the expectation that all will be followed with a specific outcome, one size fits all. TSA has been criticized for the 14


BDO program because, although officers have identified criminals, they have not identified terrorists or those with hostile intent against the airport or aviation. Since it is very difficult to measure deterrence, how do we really know of success? Have individuals studying an airport as a possible target seen BDO activity and other enhanced security measures and determined that the target was too big of a risk for mission failure?

FUTURE TRENDS The International Air Transport Association (IATA) recently released its version of the passenger-screening checkpoint of the future. The IATA concept is based on the level of trust the government has in a passenger and the subsequent level of screening that a specific passenger will receive as opposed to the current system of everyone at the same level. TSA has announced that it will pilot Trusted Traveler by the end of this year. This plan appears to be based on working with the air carriers and those passengers willing to allow historical and other personal data to be shared for vetting purposes. It raises the question of why the agency is not building on the existing Registered Traveler platform that already collects a certain amount of biographic and biometric data and previously was used by TSA to biometrically vet Registered Travelers. Both of these processes will help passenger screening to be more efficient and effective in the near and long term. However, much more can be done. Internally, airports can do more to train certain employees in behavior recognition. A behavior recognition program could be implemented at many levels and not just with law enforcement or security staff. Airport managers and supervisors and other airport and tenant personnel are the perfect individuals to detect insider threat issues. An internal behavior recognition program does not need to be complex, and web-based software applications exist that can be used to maintain skill proficiency. Examples of staff who would be prime candidates for behavioral recognition training are concession and security personnel who handle vendor deliveries and inspections, among other duties. One of my clients, HSS Inc., which provides contract security officers to some of the largest and busiest airports in the U.S., implemented a new behavior recognition program last year. These security officers interact with airline employees coming through perimeter gates, conduct vendor

inspections, patrol in passenger areas, and other activities. It is a significant force multiplier to have staff beyond TSA and law enforcement trained in behavior recognition. Airport operators need to better understand human nature and what it means to establish an environmental baseline. Setting the environmental baseline means to establish what is the normal for that area (perimeter gate, passenger boarding area, screening checkpoint, and so forth). The baseline can change in any area based on time of year, day, week, weather and other factors. We can’t continue to treat everyone the same way and expect everyone to follow the same rules. Back in the 1990s, airports begged for consistency at passenger checkpoints across the nation. Today we need to accept that each airport will be somewhat different, and that as long as we are not detained unreasonably, we should expect variances in processing. While the infrequent flyer has heard about all these rules, since he or she flies only once a year or once every few years, this traveler just doesn’t have the experience to understand the specifics. We don’t really intend to be unkind with that statement; however, it is the reality. The liquids, aerosols and gels ban is a good example. Passengers still try to bring large tubes of toothpaste and other prohibited sizes of toiletries and beverages through the checkpoint. They have heard the restrictions on the news, there are signs posted, videos and website messages produced, but the message still is missed. Additionally, the one-size-fits-all approach really needs to be modified to consider the generational component. Older people respond to instructions and information differently than younger people do. You need to be extremely flexible in your communication methods to address generational needs. It’s all fine to say, “We Twitter and are on Facebook,” for example, but airport and TSA personnel need to understand how to use the technology, be adaptive to trends, and be able to make immediate course corrections. We also need to consider the aging baby boomers. They travel and, as they age, will have more implanted body parts requiring special screening, may need wheelchairs and visual paging and other facility requirements. TSA Administrator John Pistole defined his vision for TSA with three cornerstones — redefining the mission of TSA as a national security counterterrorism agency, supporting the workforce, and engaging outside stakeholders. As technology advances, TSA should be able to

reduce its workforce. The agency reduces personnel significantly when inline baggage systems replace lobby installations, and it should be the same way as the checkpoint evolves with automated sensor technology. TSA has done well in engaging its stakeholders in areas such as the In-Depth Security Review (IDSR) group. The IDSR is comprised of TSA, AAAE and ACI-NA staff and committee chairs. They have worked well together to review existing Security Directives and other security measures that were mandated over the past decade and longer. They evaluate the necessity of the various requirements and have made recommendations for changes and removal. It has been a slow process, but acceptance has been good compared to an early effort by TSA that made sweeping changes and had some additions that airports objected to and that were never implemented.

THE NEXT DECADE I am hopeful that major strides will be made in the next decade. They say aircraft modernization will escalate 25 years in the next 10, so why can’t aviation security do the same? The bottom line is that we need to be able to continually move toward intelligence-driven, riskbased strategies and away from just identifying bad things. We need to develop and implement sensor technology, fully converge/integrate technology, implement reasonable biometric credentialing and referencing, and increase the layers of security through better insider threat detection methodology such as behavior recognition programs. We need to be sensitive to passenger human factors and growth trends, accelerate and promote innovation, be more consistent with international standards, and continually track emerging threats and provide proactive response. Further, since many experts and policymakers continue to voice the opinion that now that TSA has matured, steps should be explored to separate the agency’s potentially conflicting missions of daily aviation security operations and broad industry and internal agency oversight and regulation. The way we have always approached aviation security should be a process of the past as we move airports into the future with futuristic concepts, technology and long-term thinking. A Lori Beckman, A.A.E., is president of Aviation Security Consulting Inc. She may be reached at



Checkpoint Technology Changes Pose Challenges for Airports By Robin E. Baughman


SA continues to develop new screening technologies for passengers, carry-on articles and checked baggage. These new technologies are sometimes transparent to airport operations, especially when they are software upgrades to existing machines, but 16


deployment of new equipment is more likely to be disruptive to current operations, as well as to capital planning and budgets. The continuing large-scale deployment of Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) at checkpoints is an obvious example. Since the appearance of

AITs in 2007, airports have had to wrestle with providing space and power at checkpoints that were built long before AITs were even developed. TSA also is

investigating other wholly new checkpoint technologies — such as credentialing authentication and shoe scanners — that will have to be accommodated, if and when they are deployed. As painful as checkpoint modifications have been, they will pale in comparison to the coming recapitalization of aging explosives detection system (EDS) machines and optimization of existing checked baggage inspection systems (CBIS). Recapitalization is the replacement of the EDS machines themselves, with minimal modification to baggage handling conveyors and such changes to the controls program as are needed to meet integration standards. Optimization is a related but distinct effort. The intent of an optimization program is to correct known deficiencies through more extensive modifications to conveyors and system programming. When done in combination, a recapi-

talization and optimization project will seek to take advantage of the capabilities of new EDS machines and lessons learned since the advent of inline screening using CT technology. Next generation CT machines, in all categories, currently are undergoing certification and operational testing. TSA’s planning and prioritization for instituting recapitalization and optimization programs is a complex undertaking based on many considerations, including, but certainly not limited to, machine age, reliability, maintainability and operational availability; CBIS performance statistics; transportation security officer (TSO) staffing; and new machine availability. The agency’s effort is further complicated by budget uncertainties and the requirement for Office of Management and Budget approval of annual spending plans. Under recapitalization, it is conceivable that all project costs will be borne by TSA, presuming that sufficient funding authority is received. Implementation of combined recapitalization and optimization projects likely will be similar to the current procedure for new inline systems, where the airport is the project sponsor and receives some measure of reimbursement from TSA. One key difference may be that TSA could initiate the transaction based on priority and available funding, and notify the airport of its intent to proceed with the project and provide special guidance on project scope and schedule. Whether a project is purely recapitalization, or recap and optimization, the importance of detailed and proper project phasing to obviate impacts to active screening operations cannot be overstated. AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011


This importance rises exponentially in larger systems where major modifications are required. But, regardless of system size or project type, phasing is an essential criterion that must inform any design from the beginning and clearly will impact both the schedule and cost of the project. Apparent mundanities such as machine ingress/egress and travel path to the screening matrix cannot be overlooked. Although a formal recapitalization and optimization program is new to TSA, there are case studies upon which to draw when modifying an existing, operational CBIS. Vic Thompson Co.’s (VTC) work at Southwest Florida International Airport is such an example. The airport first commissioned VTC to provide independent assessment of its existing sevenmachine system. VTC identified mechanical and programming modifications to improve system performance, and was asked by the airport to design and lead the implementation of the recommended changes. VTC’s redesign, supported by sophisticated simulation modeling, called for the work to be done in seven phases so that the existing system could be modified at night while remaining operational during the day. Several phases overlapped with the airport’s peak season, requiring additional coordination and detailed contingency planning to keep all areas of the airport operational during construction. With implementation of the redesign, which kept the original seven CT machines in use, certified throughput was increased by 60 percent and the error rate reduced by 85 percent. Another challenge associated with modifications to an existing system is that TSA’s Planning Guidelines and Design Standards (PGDS) do not specifically address those project types. Consideration and understanding of potential operational impacts outside of the TSA screening matrix, which will influence overall system performance, are essential to clearly defining the project 18


goals, scope and cost-sharing. Reaching agreement with TSA on any exceptions to PGDS requirements at the outset of the project is especially important so that new — and unfunded — expectations aren’t imposed during TSA design reviews and/or system testing after the work is completed. As was the case with the first inline CBIS, and despite years of lessons learned, there still exists a tendency in some quarters not to consider an inline CBIS as a system-of-systems that operates very differently from age-old baggage handling systems. As a result, there are missed opportunities for efficiencies that would minimize the airport’s costs for construction, operation and maintenance. There are also missed opportunities for airports to maximize allowable and available reimbursement under cost-sharing agreements with TSA. Life-cycle costing is a significant requirement in the PGDS as it applies to new CBIS. Whether it will be required by TSA for system modifications is unknown; however, it could be a useful tool to help inform an airport’s decision process on the extent of modifications to be undertaken, separate from the issue of TSA reimbursement. For example, it may make sense to accelerate planned system changes to coincide with the TSA work, so that operational disruptions happen only once. With so many CT machines nearing the end of their anticipated useful life in an era of limited federal funding, deployment of next generation CT machines will be a massive undertaking, requiring TSA to balance many competing needs. Airports should start thinking about ways not only to mitigate the impact of recapitalization or recapitalization/optimization, but also to make the best of the inevitability and look to achieve sustainable efficiencies. A Robin E. Baughman is president of Vic Thompson Co. She may be reached at

10 Years After… a General Aviation Retrospective

By Robert Olislagers, A.A.E.


or some in general aviation, nothing has changed since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, except for the lingering resentment toward intrusions focused on making general aviation more secure. “What is the threat anyway?” is an often-heard mantra. For others, it is as fundamental as liberty itself, that those willing to sacrifice a little freedom for a little security…deserve neither, to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin. Indeed, general aviation, going back to the days of freewheeling barnstormers, embodies this essence, always remaining independent, free from the shackles of gravity, government or Al Qaida. For countless more who wax nostalgic of aerodromes sans fences, gates or guards, the romance and mystique of aviation have become something more foreboding and distant, no longer a Sunday afternoon drive to the airfield with the grandkids. For the newest generation of pilots, however, 9/11 is merely a footnote in the history books, and security is a fact of life, visible on nearly every street corner, ATM or sports venue. For those who vividly remember the crumbling, smoking towers and feel that empty pit deep down; for those for whom general aviation is part and parcel of travel or doing business; or for those simply gliding along on laughter-silvered wings, 9/11 shaped the “new normal” as former DOT Secretary Norman Mineta aptly phrased it, regardless of how one feels about it. Yet, for the most part, everyone has adjusted and moved on... except for the ones who lost family, friends or colleagues and whose pictures now grace mantles, walls and desks; our heroes who responded and now suffer the consequences of inhaling toxic smoke trying to retrieve literally shreds of humanity; and last, but not least, our men and women in harm’s way, in and out of uniform, who fight and have fought the battle against those who want to deny us liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To them, 10 years after, we pay homage and say thanks. Robert Olislagers, A.A.E., is executive director of Colorado’s Centennial Airport. He may be reached at 20


Automated Integration Services




The Transportation Security Clearinghouse’s Automated Integration Services (AIS) provides you the ability to combine and automate biometric and biographic data into a single web-based messaging architecture. The benefits of the AIS are: • Elimination for the need to create, modify and upload excel spreadsheets; •

Status updates and STA results will be delivered directly to your local system, eliminating the need to check multiple systems for updates and approvals; and,

Saves your airport time and money by entering employee data into one single system.

The AIS provides a simple, automated process to submit Security Threat Assessments (STA) and Criminal History Record Checks (CHRC) to the TSC. Using a secure web-based messaging architecture that enables two-way communication, the AIS provides a link directly to the Clearinghouse, allowing airports to directly submit biographic and biographical data to the TSC and allowing the TSC to proactively provide STA results and status reports directly to airports in real time. The AIS reduces staff time by directly connecting your airport’s access control and credentialing systems to the Clearinghouse and provides a TSA-compliant vetting platform. There is no fee to sign-up; TSC will provide initial software free of charge and help your badging office set-up the new services.

601 Madison St. | Suite 400 | Alexandria,VA 22314 | T: 703-797-2550 |


he tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001, changed aviation security forever in almost every aspect. Ten years later, the changes are remarkable, especially in areas that have seen constant change and increased requirements over the last decade, such as the vetting and badging of aviation employees at airports. Prior to Sept. 11, 2011, a very small percentage of airport workers were required to submit fingerprints for Criminal History Records Checks (CHRCs) conducted by the Federal Bureau of 22


Investigation (FBI). At the time, only airport operators with employees who had a significant lapse in their employment history had to submit employees’ fingerprints to the FBI through the federal government’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM). A select number of larger airports also were piloting a program to conduct CHRCs on a greater percentage of the employee population with access to secure areas, also submitting fingerprints through OPM. As a federal agency, OPM had no mechanisms to track fingerprints submitted or to reconcile financial data on behalf of airport operators. It

or applicant. Recognizing that airports could not operate if they had to wait months for fingerprints results before granting their current and future badgeholders access to secure areas of their facilities, AAAE quickly mobilized to create the Transportation Security Clearinghouse (TSC). Created in partnership with the federal government — FAA at first and then the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA) after its creation — the TSC developed a central platform to quickly and cost effectively process background vetting requests, including fingerprint-based CHRCs, for the aviation community. Created in fewer than 40 days, the TSC set up and brought online more than 500 separate airport and airline submitting entities with the first high-speed secure connection to the federal fingerprint processing system. With realtime processing, submissions to the federal government now no longer require days or weeks to see results; instead, fingerprint submissions pass through the TSC at an average speed of 16 minutes per record. As the threat to aviation has evolved, the background check requirements for aviation workers


is no wonder that, under OPM, the processing of airports’ fingerprint submissions took an average of 52 days. One of the first regulations put in place after Sept. 11, 2001, was the federal mandate requiring airport operators to conduct a CHRC for each individual employed in, or applying for, a position in any secure area of the airport. Airports were faced with the daunting task of checking the backgrounds of more than 1 million active aviation employees in a single year, even though the average processing time was 52 days per employee

have evolved as well, growing more detailed and complex year by year. In particular, in 2004, TSA began to require Security Threat Assessments (STAs) for aviation workers, which are name-based checks that TSA performs against a number of terrorism watch lists. Airports have had to adapt as TSA has changed data submission for STAs over the years, as well as the scope of the aviation worker population subject to STAs. Once again, to ease the regulatory burden of airports, the TSC worked to facilitate STA data submission on behalf of airports as quickly and as cost effectively as AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011


Since its inception, the TSC has become the nation’s largest civilian clearinghouse, processing more than a quarter of a million STAs and a million biometrically based CHRCs for aviation workers each year. More importantly, the clearinghouse has held steadfast to its mission of easing the regulatory burden of the aviation industry with innovative solutions, pioneering technology and world-class customer service. possible. In fact, at one point as the regulatory data submission requirements were changing faster than even the TSA’s information technology systems could keep up, the clearinghouse maintained two of its own systems — accepting information for airports using updated systems and converting the information manually to submit it to TSA. In addition to helping the aviation industry meet new mandates imposed by TSA as easily and efficiently as possible, the TSC has added certain services and features based on customers’ input and requests. Since its beginning, and at the customers’ request, the TSC created a process wherein fingerprints warehoused in the secure database could be extracted and resubmitted to federal agencies for another background check, referred to as re-vetting. The TSC’s resubmission process for re-vetting allows employers to resubmit fingerprints without having to call the employee to the badging office for repeated fingerprints, saving valuable time for the employee and for the airport’s fingerprinting personnel. This also allows airports to conduct recurrent CHRCs, which are not required but are recommended as a best practice, at a reduced cost and on their own timetable. More recently, in response to airport customers’ requests to provide an alternative to spreadsheets for the submission of STA data, the TSC developed a secure web-based messaging system known as Automated Integration Services (AIS). AIS provides a streamlined solution for submitting STA and CHRC data to the TSC. Using a secure web-based messaging architecture that enables two-way communication between an airport’s database systems and the TSC, AIS allows airports to directly submit biographical and biometric data to the TSC and receive results back to their internal systems. AIS encompasses a range of services provided by the TSC that can be tailored to an airport’s size, budget and network or information technology capabilities. For example, for smaller airports, the AIS messaging structure is accomplished through direct data entry into the TSC system using the Web Enroll interface. AIS also was developed in close coordination with the Biometric Airport Security Identification Consortium (BASIC) Early Adopter airports. BASIC 24


is an airport-driven effort to develop, in cooperation with TSA, a voluntary standards-based framework for biometric-based credentialing and access control systems at airports that build off existing processes and investments; the BASIC Early Adopter airports already proactively are adhering to the BASIC Concept of Operations. The first phase of the BASIC Concept of Operations calls for the automated and secure submission of biographic (STA) and biometric (CHRC) data. Future phases of BASIC allow for the return of secure data back to the airport, specifically secure biometric templates that can be used on credentials and as part of access control systems for biometric verification of individuals. The two-way message structure of the TSC’s AIS enables the return of STA results today and biometric templates in the near future. Since its inception, the TSC has become the nation’s largest civilian clearinghouse, processing more than a quarter of a million STAs and a million biometrically based CHRCs for aviation workers each year. More importantly, the clearinghouse has held steadfast to its mission of easing the regulatory burden of the aviation industry with innovative solutions, pioneering technology and world-class customer service. As a TSA-approved Designated Aviation Channeler, the TSC is ready to continue to work with and on behalf of airports to quickly and cost effectively meet the complex and changing demands related to the background vetting of aviation employees for decades to come. With its aviation focus, innovative IT infrastructure and highly trained customer service staff, the TSC aims to make airport’s vetting and badging operations and compliance as easy as possible. Ten years after Sept. 11, 2011, aviation remains a prime terrorist target; airport operators have been and continue to remain vigilant in the fight to protect the nation’s aviation infrastructure. AAAE and the TSC are proud to support airports in their efforts by providing world-class service to the aviation community, while cost-effectively and conveniently assisting in complying with government mandates and security regulations. A Colleen Chamberlain is AAAEs staff vice president, transportation security policy. She may be reached at colleen.




s early as 1997, residents located near Lambert-St. Louis International were filing noise complaints with the airport, which had more than 1,000 daily flights at the time. Help arrived in 1999 in the form of FAA’s FAR Part 150 Noise Mitigation Program. A pilot program was conducted in the nearby cities of Ferguson, Cool Valley, Woodson Terrace and Hazelwood to assess how noise enters a home and discern the best method to reduce the noise level. About 60 homes signed up for the pilot program, which was a success. FAA then approved the fullscale program. The Residential Sound Insulation Program shifted into high gear in 2001 to include residents who owned their property on or before Jan. 10, 1997. Jan Titus, airport noise program manager, has worked with the program since its inception. “By 2010, we had already treated 1,100 of the eligible homes, and we have about 200 homes that are still eligible,” she explained.“The goal is to complete the program by the end of 2012.” Ferguson homeowner Curt Smith has lived in his house more than 20 years. His home meets the noise abatement requirements and is located in an emerging historic district. Smith said he noticed the airplane noise years ago when his family first moved in, but as time went by he became accustomed to it. “I’m happy for the program,” Smith said. In his case, airport officials informed him about the program. “I wasn’t aware of it,” he noted. Smith predicted that he will notice a reduction in airport noise once the replacement windows are installed. The Smith family will receive wooden windows in the back of their home and aluminum windows throughout the rest of the home, according to Titus. The airport’s team of inspectors and contractors follows all environmental rules, regulations and procedures, Titus said. Contractors can face numerous

unexpected challenges, she added, including asbestos and water damage, that could cause a job to take a little longer than usual. Generally, Titus said it takes five days to install windows in brick and frame houses and 14 days for historical homes due to the intricate interior woodwork. “We had one home that was infested with termites,” Titus said. “In that case, the homeowner was responsible for the cost because it was considered home repair work. Once the termites were gone, we were able to complete the window installation.” The acoustical program adheres to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for asbestos and lead removal. St. Louis County Health Department permits are required before the contractor’s environmental subcontractor removes the asbestos or abates lead. All contractors are required to have lead renovation certification and be certified as asbestos handlers and remediators. Titus said that only those homes that have greater than 45 dB interior noise level are eligible to receive acoustical treatment. If the interior level falls below 45 dB, the homeowner is offered the option of the Avigation Easement Purchase Program. Typical sound insulation treatments include replacing the windows and doors, baffles near openings in the attic and crawl space areas, and weather stripping and caulking where needed. Some provisions are made for central air conditioning for residences without a system. “Since the inception of the program, we’ve seen a dramatic decrease in the number of complaints about airplane noise,” Titus said. She added, “It makes me happy to know we have helped residents so they don’t have to move out of their homes because of the noise, and we’ve shown these communities that Lambert is a good neighbor.” A Deneen Busby is a public relations officer at Lambert-St. Louis International. She may be reached at AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011



AIRPORT MANAGEMENT It’s been 30 years since President Reagan fired striking members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO). For some, second career opportunities opened up in airport management. Airport Magazine appreciates the contributions of the following nine airport officials who describe their transition from PATCO air traffic controller to the airport management industry. Responses have been edited for length.

n BRUCE E. CARTER, A.A.E., DIRECTOR, QUAD CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (ILL.), AND FIRST VICE CHAIR, AAAE Following the PATCO strike in 1981, I explored opportunities for continued employment in the aviation community. My love of flying never wavered, and the thought of leaving aviation was not an option.  Through the support of the Small Business Administration, my wife and I purchased an FBO in Clarion, Iowa. We managed Clarion Municipal Airport, employed mechanics at our maintenance shop, conducted a flight school, and ran a charter 26


service throughout Iowa and the Midwest. This experience allowed me to use my skills as a pilot, while gaining valuable knowledge about the challenges of owning and operating a small business. I obtained my flight instructor certification during this time. After two years in Clarion, I applied for and was hired in 1984 as assistant airport director in Waterloo, Iowa. I believe the airport management and FBO experiences in Clarion were a fortunate springboard into a larger airport management career. In 1991, I became the airport director in Springfield, Ill. In 1994, I became the airport director at Peoria, Ill, and for the past 11 and

one-half years I have been airport director in the Quad Cities. AAAE has been very instrumental in furthering my career as an airport executive and provides more opportunities to learn than any other aviation trade organization in existence.

n PHILLIP E. JOHNSON, A.A.E., DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GERALD R. FORD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (MICH.) AND MEMBER, AAAE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. I was hired by FAA at the Oakland Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) in July 1978 at the age of 19. I was the youngest controller hired at the time. When the strike happened on Aug., 3, 1981, I

had just three years as a controller, all as a trainee. Since I only had an associate’s degree at the time and no family to support, I returned to college. After graduation, I was hired by Hughes Aircraft Company’s Ground System Group as a systems engineer, working on air traffic control and air defense systems. While at Hughes, I pursued my master’s degree in systems management. I really didn’t think about a career in airport management until the later years of my stint at Hughes when we had lost a contract with FAA, and I was wondering what else I could do there. I met the airport manager at Fullerton (Calif.) Municipal Airport, who happened to be a former PATCO controller, and he introduced me to the AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011




field of airport management and to the resources at AAAE. I was hired by Los Angeles International Airport in airfield operations in October 1989 and stayed there until August 1991, when I joined Long Beach (Calif.) Airport in airfield operations. I had made the move to gain experience at a smaller airport and learn more about all the different areas in airport management. I also received my A.A.E. while at Long Beach. I was hired in 1994 to work at Gerald R. Ford International Airport in the position I still hold today — deputy executive director.

n JAN NIELSEN, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTORHUMAN RESOURCES, METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION (MAC), MINN. For three years following the 1981 PATCO strike, I worked in a variety of jobs, including numerous assignments with temp agencies, a variety of parttime jobs, as a Mary Kay consultant, and then selling new cars after going through a job search with a head hunter. In 1984, I saw a newspaper ad for a job with the MAC and applied. I originally interviewed for a position with our noise department but was encouraged to hold off and consider an upcoming operations coordinator job in the Operations Center. My aviation background and my air traffic controller experience were both of interest to them. I was successful in hiring into that position and worked in that role for two years at Minneapolis/ St. Paul International. I was promoted to manage three of MAC’s six reliever airports, which I did for the next two and a half years. After spending almost five years in the operations area, I wanted to learn more about the revenue business of airport management and secured a position with MAC as a properties manager, which involved tenant relations, lease negotiations, airport land appraisals, and most of our off-airport leases. In 1996, during an organizational restructuring, I was assigned to the human resources division. 28



Working as an air traffic controller and at the variety of line and staff positions with the MAC has provided me with a broad base of knowledge in airport management and a very satisfying career in the aviation industry.

n CARRIE NOVICK, A.A.E., MANAGER, ROBERTS FIELD, REDMOND (ORE.) MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Originally a military air traffic controller, I was part of FAA for 13 years when we went on strike. After the strike, I went to work in the operations division at Houston Intercontinental Airport. I think my ATC experience was one of the reasons I was hired at Houston Intercontinental. I knew the controller jargon, and I was very comfortable with the controllers on the radio and operating on the airfield. I was easy to train and not afraid of taking charge of situations and responsibility for things happening on the airport. As a plus for the airport, I actually knew most of the air traffic management team at Houston and was able to forge a close working relationship between them and the airport operations team for the first time. I was hired by the city of Redmond as airport manager in April of 1990, and I plan to retire this fall. I believe my experience as an FAA tower controller worked to the city of Redmond’s advantage when it came time to make the argument in the early 1990s for the installation of both an air traffic control tower and eventually our BI 6 Radar facility. The first day at Redmond Airport, I contacted both the airport’s FAA Certification Inspector and Security Inspector to advise them that I was the new manager and that all their maintenance and security issues would be dealt with, but I would need some time to do it. They not only provided me the time but also the support and the grants to make the changes that transformed the airport into the regional airport it is today. I was very lucky. I took my experience as a controller and made it work for me and for Redmond airport.

KEEPING COMMERCE IN FLIGHT: 100 Years of Commercial Airports

A 2011 Report for the Aviation Industry Prepared by Burns & McDonnell

2011_A&F_special report.indd 1

8/22/11 9:55 AM

The Fascination of Flight: Airport Innovation for the Next Century Flying captures — and holds — the imagination of people young and old like few other concepts. It has for centuries, long before anyone successfully lifted off the ground. From Greek mythology to Leonardo da Vinci to Howard Hughes, the idea of flight fascinates and propels us. David G. Yeamans

The innovations of a century of commercial airports are a testament to the

President Aviation & Facilities Group Burns & McDonnell

hold it has over business executives, engineers and the traveling public alike. We want to fly better, faster, farther and higher. The 2011 Aviation Special Report pays tribute to the spirit of invention that has made the commercial aviation industry grow and change over the past 100 years — and will drive it onward into the next. Burns & McDonnell will be right there with you.


2011_A&F_special report.indd 2

Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM

4 6 7 8 10 12 14 16 18

Laying Claim to ‘First’: Celebrating a Century of Aviation History A Travel Evolution: The Changing Nature of the Passenger Experience Novelty to Necessity: Airport Concessions Maximize Convenience, Minimize Costs 100 Years of Hangar Advances: Helping Commercial Airports Prosper Project Runway: Piecing Together the Puzzle of Complex Airfields The Funding Factor: Planning Is Key in Keeping Airports in Business Natural Disaster Vulnerability: A Real Risk for Airports Looking to the Future: New Tool Brings Airspace Down to Earth Fast Forward: Where Will Technology Take the Passenger Experience?

Corporate Marketing: Joe Brooks, director; Kevin Fox, marketing manager Editor: Shonna Dexter Contributing Editor: Darla Amstein Art Direction and Design: Beth Mackey © 2011 Burns & McDonnell

2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 3

8/22/11 9:55 AM

Laying Claim to ‘First’: Celebrating a Century of Aviation History By Randy Pope, PE

Nearly 100 years ago, commercial aviation began springing up around the world. Upper-class Americans, Europeans and businessmen began to sign on for the 12- and 17-passenger short and uncomfortable flights. This newfound mode of transportation brought them to their destination more quickly than rail service could promise. With those flights came the need for commercial airports. Much discussion and debate will no doubt reign over the next few years as we enter the second century of commercial aviation, with airports throughout the world staking claim to the title of “first.” The Military Factor Like many aviation developments throughout the century, the first commercial airport likely sprung from the military. One airport that can certainly lay claim to being first was Le Bourget near Paris. Here, as at so many other airports, facilities began to be built to accommodate the new passenger traffic. During World War II, many commercial airports were taken over for military operations. However, another of the earliest commercial airports worldwide was never used solely for military purposes. The Tempelhof Airport in Berlin was open during World War II but was never used by the Nazis for war operations. The airport was decommissioned in 2008 and has been transformed into Berlin’s largest park. It still boasts the third largest building in the world, the former airport terminal.



First passenger flight: Wilbur Wright takes an employee along for a ride 4

2011_A&F_special report.indd 4

An International Affair Many of the facilities claiming to be the first commercial airport are overseas. In the United States, the Newark International Airport has grounds to make its declaration. The airfield was built in 1928, and Amelia Earhart dedicated the terminal building in 1935. In its early days, Newark International was the busiest airport in the world. Officials boast of being home to many of the nation’s aviation firsts, including: • First passenger terminal • First paved runway • First air traffic control tower • First runway with lighting • First airport weather stations By 1939, Newark was the nation’s busiest airport, handling 481,000 passengers — a huge number at that time. Other commercial airports firsts: • Miami International Airport, built in 1928 and home to startup airlines Pan Am and Eastern • Taliedo Airport in Milan, Italy, which traces back to the 1910s • Flughafen Devau, near what was then Konigsberg, East Prussia, built from 1919-1921 • S. Darius and S. Girenas Airport in Kaunas, Lithuania, which opened in 1915 • Croydon Airport in South London, which started air traffic control in 1921 • Sydney Airport in Australia claims to be the world’s oldest continuously operating airport, with its opening flights tracing to 1920 No matter who was first, commercial aviation has evolved significantly in the past century. As the next generation of jumbo jets takes off and airlines test new ways to lure and satisfy passengers, the industry will see a new wave of evolution in technology and travel.

Army Airfield established at College Park, Md., by Wilbur Wright, making it the longest continuously operating airport in the world today


1910 Orville Wright opens the first commercial flight school in Montgomery, Ala. Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM

In 1910, flying boats landed and departed from the port of Southampton, England. The mayor

Photo: New Jersey State Archives, Department of State

then named this facility an “air-port.�

Control tower, Sydney Airport.

Newark International Airport.



Silas Christofferson carries passengers by hydroplane between San Francisco and Oakland harbors



Burgess Co. becomes the first licensed commercial aircraft manufacturer

National Air Mail service inaugurated

2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 5

8/22/11 9:55 AM

A Travel Evolution: The Changing Nature of the Passenger Experience By Bret Pilney, PE, LEED AP

When commercial flights began to take off, convenience of passengers wasn’t much of a concern. Simply getting them from point A to point B was a feat in and of itself. As the years have passed, however, the needs and comfort level of passengers have come to the forefront as airlines and the industries that support them recognized the role of passengers in profitability. In the early days of commercial flight, the passenger experience was simple. Because so few people could afford to fly and commercial airline accommodations were limited, commercial airports served a limited purpose: to allow the planes a place to take off and land. Passengers carried their own luggage and boarded planes on the apron. Eventually, stewards boarded flights to make the flying experience more comfortable and handled luggage before the flight — the early baggage handlers.

Today, travelers’ comfort is at the forefront of the design process. Even before arriving at the terminal, people need to feel at ease with the process. Burns & McDonnell works with airline and airport clients to lessen friction from the first step onto the property through boarding at the gate. By working with all stakeholders, we make design and construction of terminal improvements as seamless as possible for travelers and airport staff alike. Whether the project is parking improvements, way finding, security or concessions, communication is key in creating a positive airport experience for passengers. In the early days of flight, the stress of flying was primarily about whether you would arrive at your destination or not. Today, many travelers experience stress throughout their journey. Burns & McDonnell works with airline and airport clients to reduce passenger anxiety at every stage of their trip. After all, a relaxed passenger will spend more time and more money on travel. And that’s good for everyone.

As commercial travel became less expensive and available to more people, the airport experience grew in importance. After World War II, airport design became more sophisticated, and terminal design began to evolve. Passengers were routed through terminals to board their flights, rather than simply walking or driving onto the apron. As air travel began to surpass rail travel, amenities for the traveling public and creating a transition from the terminal entrance to boarding areas became the standard for design. During the boom of air travel, amenities during flight were an important aspect of making passengers comfortable. Progressing from airport arrival to boarding was less stressful in earlier times. With no baggage screening or security checkpoints, travelers walked throughout the terminal at their leisure. Commercial air travel was an experience in and of itself.


Passenger expectations for the airport experience have evolved to emphasize comfort and convenience.

Sydney Airport opens for commercial service


KLM begins operation, making it the oldest carrier in the world still operating under its original name 6

2011_A&F_special report.indd 6



1920 Minneapolis-St.Paul International Airport opens for commercial service Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM


Novelty to Necessity: Airport Concessions Maximize Convenience, Minimize Costs By Katherine Goudreau, Burns & McDonnell, and Rhett Workman, US Airways

The commercial airport was still a novelty in the 1940s. Washington National Airport leveraged the innovation of flight to draw consumers to an upscale restaurant where patrons could view aircraft taking off and landing. It wasn’t until later in the century, when commercial flights became more economically feasible for more passengers, that the airport concessions industry became a viable business. In fact, food and concessions have become an important part of the passenger experience in the past three decades. Beginning in the 1980s, airport concession areas mimicked shopping mall food courts. Most commercial airports offered options for quick dining, sit-down meals, bookstores and souvenir shops. Because terminals were open to everyone, passengers, guests and community members alike had a range of options for spending time and money within the terminal. After Sept. 11, 2001, the commercial airline industry changed dramatically. The impacts on the concessions world were equally significant. Security checkpoints now create a barrier among the traveling public, airport employees and the visiting public. Concessions are a key to traveler convenience as well as a revenue generator that keeps airport costs down for all users and offsets facility expenses. So how can the spaces before and after the security divide be maximized? Burns & McDonnell’s long-standing partnership with US Airways has helped enhance the airport experience for the airline’s customers in a variety of ways. The team is currently working on a $117 million redesign and expansion of the US Airways’ 38-gate Express Terminal at Philadelphia International Airport. Once completed, the new Express Terminal will deliver passenger comfort and convenience at a whole new level, with a concession program that doubles current offerings.

A trial area greets passengers at a gate in the Philadelphia International Airport.

Future airport concession areas must go beyond variety and convenience to passengers, bringing the concession experience closer to the passenger boarding area. US Airways is exploring options that bring food and beverage concessions into the boarding area with café, bar and lounge seating. Other enhancements could include taking food orders via portable tablet devices such as iPads. Travelers in the boarding area could have food delivered from anywhere within the terminal while they wait for their flight within the post-screening area. In developing the latest concepts in airport concessions, Burns & McDonnell and US Airways are partnering with innovative companies like Marketplace Development and OTG. The key is to collaboratively create flexible concession environments that can adapt to future airline and airport business practices and passenger preferences. In the past 70 years, airport concessions have evolved from novelty to necessity. Burns & McDonnell will continue to team with airports, airlines and concessionaires to plan, design and maximize the concessions industry to the benefit of all airport users and the traveling public.

First permanent airport and commercial terminal used solely for commercial flights opens at Flughafen Devau near Konigsberg, East Prussia




International air service is offered by Aeromarine West Indies Airways between Key West, Fla. and Havana, Cuba

Aeromarine Airways of Cleveland, Ohio, is established as the first airline ticketing agency

2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 7

8/22/11 9:55 AM

100 Years of Hangar Advances: Helping Commercial Airports Prosper By Patrick Brown, AIA, LEED AP

Successful commercial airport operations depend on many parts of the system coming together to best serve the flying public. Hangars are seldom mentioned as a part of those airport operations, but safe and reliable aircraft, kept on-line and flying every day, form the nucleus of the entire air transportation network. Without hangars, aircraft availability is diminished, and air service becomes less reliable. Some of the first known aircraft hangars are linked to the birth of aviation. A hangar at Kitty Hawk, little more than an outdoor timber shed constructed in 1902, served as the shelter for the original Wright Flyer before the Wright brothers made aviation history in 1903. Hangars came about at commercial airports when aircraft stayed airworthy long enough to need repair instead of replacement. General aviation pioneer Clyde Cessna crash landed his first aircraft 12 times before making his first successful landing in 1911. When aircraft actually landed, remained intact and airworthy or in need of only minor repair, hangars became essential. Hangars soon became standard as new commercial airports were being built around the United States. Burbank United Airport (now Bob Hope Airport) opened in 1930 with a terminal and two hangars to support aircraft production and maintenance. Changing Aircraft, Changing Facilities Burns & McDonnell embarked on its first hangar project in 1942 at Smoky Hill Army Airfield in Salina, Kan. This hangar is still in use today at what is now the Salina Municipal Airport. While the longevity of the structure is a testament to the design, it hardly meets today’s sophisticated demands for hangar technology. As aircraft grew in length and wingspan, hangars


answered the challenge with longer clear spans and larger operable doors. Hangar technology also advanced with aircraft technology. From the DC-3 and DC-6 piston engine airliners to the jet age of the DC-8 and B707, and on to the B747-8 and A380, aircraft size and complexity keep hangar designers and builders challenged to provide larger and more advanced buildings. Gains in aircraft complexity now require repairs to be divided among components and subsystems. Hangar facilities added shops for component repairs. Today’s advanced aircraft Maintenance Repair & Overhaul (MRO) facilities have a variety of repair shops. Burns & McDonnell is engaged in a project that includes more than 40 shops for functions such as seat repair, landing gear overhaul and advanced avionics repair. These shops also support 20 hangar bays. Safety and Efficiency for Crews Aircraft became so complex and so large that working from a ladder or a simple stand was impractical. Larger components must be handled by overhead cranes in a hangar bay. Simple work stands have evolved into sophisticated work docks. Burns & McDonnell’s latest hangar designs include adjustable work docks for the nose, fuselage, wings and tail, with some docks suspended from the long-span roof above. This allows the docks to be adjusted to accommodate varied aircraft. It also enables connections for power and compressed air for tools, work lights and air conditioning for workers. Over time, as aircraft fleets grew, airlines saw maintenance tasks grow beyond their staffing and facilities capacity. Commercial airports found less area available for large hangar and shop complexes. Third-party MRO companies were born. In today’s competitive environment for MRO work, tasks are

Congress adopts the Air Commerce Act of 1926, which authorized the Secretary of Commerce to designate air routes, develop air navigation systems, and license pilots and aircraft


First transcontinental non-stop flight


2011_A&F_special report.indd 8


1926 Deutsche Luft Hansa (now known as Lufthansa) begins scheduled service in Germany Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM


expedited to speed the aircraft back into revenue-producing flight, minimizing hangar turn times. Today’s newest hangar facilities are equipped with work docks, automated parts storage and delivery, and shop innovations that make quicker work possible. Commitment to technology also reduces the work hours required to complete repairs through increased efficiency and productivity, keeping MRO providers competitive. From the Wright brothers’ simple shed on Kill Devil Hills to today’s complex hangar and maintenance facilities, the first century of commercial airports witnessed steady growth and advances in aircraft maintenance and safety reliability. Thanks to advances in maintenance technology and the hangar facilities that support and enhance that technology, commercial airports operate today with safe and reliable aircraft to serve the traveling public.

Why is the aviation term hangar spelled differently than the hanger in your closet? One of the most misspelled words, h-a-n-g-a-r comes from Middle French hanghart, meaning enclosure near a house. The word was no doubt adapted and adopted to describe this unique building type.

Airfield hangars have evolved from the round-topped buildings of the early years to complex, efficient facilities that we know today.

Pan American Airlines inaugurates its first passenger flight from Miami to San Juan by way of Belize and Managua




First flight lands at Candler Field, today’s busiest U.S. airport — Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

First female flight attendant, Ellen Church, is hired by Boeing Air Transport (now United Airlines)

2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 9

8/22/11 9:55 AM

Project Runway: Piecing Together the Puzzle of Complex Airfields By Renita Mollman, PE, LEED AP

In the beginning of flight, airfields were quite simple — nothing but large fields that allowed pilots to take off and land into the wind, no matter its direction. Like everything else in the aviation industry, though, airfields have evolved. Those large vacant fields have given way to to well-considered and complex concrete paths. Airstrips and Runways As aircraft evolved in the 1950s and air travel became a desired form of transportation for the general public, the simple grass landing strips would no longer suffice. Heavier aircraft with tail wheels that enabled ground steering forced the conversion of airstrips from grass and gravel to pavement capable of supporting the weight and technological advances. Today, grass landing strips still dot the American landscape and serve rural air traffic well. Private, small community and small regional airports may be home to a single airstrip suitable for general aviation and corporate needs. Meanwhile, major cities and international airports boast long parallel and intersecting runways to serve larger commercial and cargo jets. Navigational Aids In the early days of flying, navigational aids were essentially non-existent. Pilots flew by looking out their cockpit window and navigating along the landscape. Once nighttime flying became necessary, particularly for the U.S. Postal Service, bonfires were lit from town to town to guide the pilots. In the early 1920s, beacons began to be placed on towers across the country at distances of every 15 to 25 miles, creating flight lines for pilots to follow.


Technology has come a long way from those early days. Complex ground lighting and highly reflective pavement markings, along with sophisticated GPS-based navigational aids and radar, enable easy identification of airports for approaching aircraft. Safety These advances added a measure of safety that did not exist in earlier days. With aircraft and airfields only beginning to grow, congested air traffic was not a concern. Before navigational aids, pilots simply circled an airport, checked for obstructions and traffic, then landed if the field was clear. Over the years, safety became a driving force in airfield development. It is of utmost importance at commercial airports worldwide. Instrument landing systems guide pilots through inclement weather, while runways are pushed farther apart to accommodate larger aircraft. Standardized navigational aids combine with air traffic control systems to keep the traveling public safe as they arrive and depart. The complexity of modern airfields means that any expansion, change or new development — regardless of size — requires a team with experience and understanding of how the facilities interact with pilots in flight, providing the necessary facilities, runways, taxiways, lighting, pavement markings and safety features to protect the traveling public and the investment of airlines and communities. Burns & McDonnell has been guiding airfield stakeholders through these processes for decades, and our expertise will see every project through to successful completion.

Boeing designs the 307 Stratoliner, the first commercial aircraft with a pressurized cabin


United Airlines begins flying coast to coast with a Boeing 247 flight lasting nearly 20 hours 10

2011_A&F_special report.indd 10


1935 Amelia Earhart dedicates the Newark Airport Administration Building, North America’s first commercial airline terminal Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM

rt rst

Nighttime navigational aids have graduated from bonfires to complex ground lighting systems.

Did You Know … A Gibraltar Airport runway crosses a road used to travel from Gibraltar to Spain. When a plane lands or takes off, a stoplight and gates halt the road traffic to give arriving or departing aircraft the right-of-way.

Pan American begins transatlantic passenger service



Pan American inaugurates passenger flights across the Pacific Ocean

1939 New York Municipal Airport opens, later renamed LaGuardia Airport after New York Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, who refused to deplane at Newark, N.J., because his ticket read “New York”

2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 11

8/22/11 9:55 AM

The Funding Factor: Planning Is Key in Keeping Airports in Business By Dave Hadel, PE

When federal airport funding was established after World War II, the funding was supported by the general fund of the U.S. Treasury. At the time, funds were sufficient for the airports being established to meet the demand for increased public air traffic. Funding requirements have changed significantly over the years. Today, the airports within the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) are funded in part through the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Improvement Program. As the airport sponsor’s engineer, Burns & McDonnell is helping these airports identify potential projects and develop program cost estimates. This information is submitted to the FAA for inclusion into the sponsor’s Airport Capital Improvement Program. These federal funds are collected through user fees, fuel taxes and other sources. These funds are converted to grants dedicated to aviation improvements. Distribution of these funds is allocated in multiple categories, including safety, runways, taxiways, aprons, vertical infrastructure and fueling. In general, large and medium hub airport projects are funded at a 75-25 ratio. Seventy-five percent of the project will be funded from federal grants. The sponsor is responsible for the remaining 25 percent. For small primary, reliever and general aviation airports, the federal ratio is increased to 95-5. Regardless of airport size, the business of aviation requires continual upkeep. Cost is an important consideration of maintenance and modernization. Maximizing value added and justifying costs are the challenges every airport program faces. The FAA requires sponsors to provide a benefit-cost or life-cycle cost analysis for each project. It is the sponsor’s responsibility to include these studies as part of every grant received.



Many commercial airlines and airports go offline to commercial traffic to support World War II military efforts 12

2011_A&F_special report.indd 12

Airports large and small may choose to have outside assistance in matching the needed improvements with the available funding in order to optimize available money. The airport’s staff expertise can be augmented to ensure all necessary projects are brought to light. Burns & McDonnell, for example, helps prepare grant requests and match needed improvements with solutions that work with grant timelines and restraints.


Stretching Dollars with Technology Burns & McDonnell is combining traditional methods with increasing uses of today’s technology to help airports save time and money on pavement management programs. By involving our geographic information systems (GIS) professionals in on-site data collection, we are modernizing a traditional system and producing better results. This field effort includes making visual observations of the existing concrete and asphalt pavements. Characteristics recorded may include cracks, ruts, raveling, joint spalling, shattered panels and a host of other discernable pavement conditions. The field data collected and photographed at the airport is sent back to our offices electronically for real-time reviews. Issues can then be addressed while employees are still in the field, for a more efficient use of time and resources — resulting in a better product for less cost. This eliminates the need for more site visits and streamlines data collection from the field to the office. The timely and cost-effective approach makes pavement management reports more efficient, and the data can be repurposed for historical review and other GIS uses.

Transatlantic route is the world’s most traveled air route



De Havilland Comet becomes the world’s first commercial jet airliner

Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM

es the irliner

In fiscal year 2008, the FAA Airport Improvement Program funded more than 2,400 new grants and 777 grant amendments totaling $3.5 billion.

Burns & McDonnell has assisted with planning and execution of projects from paving replacement to terminal renovations at Kansas City International Airport.



Smaller airfields, such as the Hays Regional Airport in Kansas, rely on the FAA Airport Improvement Program for project funding.

Today’s second busiest airport internationally, Beijing Capital International Airport, opens


1959 American Airlines offers first domestic jetliner flights with routes from New York to Los Angeles

Pan American initiates its New York to London route with the Boeing 707 2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 13

8/22/11 9:55 AM

Natural Disaster Vulnerability: A Real Risk for Airports By Grant Smith

Natural disasters have always affected air travel and airport infrastructure. Designing and constructing facilities to minimize damage risk is the key. In 2011 alone, tornados, fire, tsunamis and volcanic eruptions have disrupted travel and devastated airport operations around the world. While no one can eliminate the dangers of such disasters, updating infrastructure and developing a response plan will help weather the storm.

The only airport taken out of service for an extended time was Sendai Airport, which was devastated by the tsunami that followed. Many airports on the U.S. West Coast have upgraded their facilities during the past 30 to 40 years, building to meet stricter seismic codes. Some facilities, however, predate the 1970s, when many structural design improvements were mandated in building codes.

Earthquakes are perhaps the most destructive disasters for airports and aviation facilities. The absence of a warning period means earthquakes can cause more injuries to people in the facilities and major damage to structures that aren’t up to par. Earthquakes quickly emphasize where sufficient emergency plans, procedures and policies are not in place. Burns & McDonnell works with airports across the country, especially those in earthquake-prone areas, to help plan for earthquakes and mitigate the damage they can cause, especially to the fuel systems and fuel farms that pose great potential risk.

Other natural disasters can significantly disrupt airport facilities. The tornado that hit Lambert-St. Louis International Airport in April 2011 caused considerable damage to a terminal building. The airport had enough capacity to switch flights to gates that were not damaged, creating flexibility while damage was repaired.

Facilities built before the early 1970s lack the structural steel and other design features required by modern building codes. Older structures are more vulnerable to major earthquake damage, but newer structures may avoid collapse but still suffer permanent damage. This depends, of course, on the magnitude of the quake, the soil conditions and the structure’s proximity to the epicenter. The U.S. West Coast has the biggest threat of earthquakes and the tsunamis that may come after them. The recent 9.0 magnitude earthquake in Japan demonstrates how modern design and construction can withstand the effects of a major earthquake. All major airports in Japan were operating within a few days of the earthquake — without substantial infrastructure damage.



Attorney General Robert Kennedy swears in the first FAA peace officers, who act as air marshals on requested flights 14

2011_A&F_special report.indd 14

A March 2011 fire at Miami International Airport was not a result of a natural disaster, but it did show the importance of the fuel supply in airport operations. The loss of the hydrant pumping system significantly reduced fuel flow to aircraft and resulted in hundreds of cancelled flights. Getting these systems back into operation soon after a problem like this requires planning. The operator, airlines, airport and fuel suppliers need to coordinate resources. While the exact system or site of a failure can’t be predicted, a plan can be in place to establish qualified contractors, define the chain of command and identify organizational structure ahead of time. Emergency response plans are developed for fuel spills and required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for large bulk fuel facilities. This can be expanded for infrastructure damage.

The modern-day FAA is established as part of the U.S. Department of Transportation


1973 The first female airline pilot, Emily Warner, flies as second officer for Frontier Airlines Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM

Burns & McDonnell is helping airport and aviation clients identify vulnerable assets and develop emergency response plans for all types of airport and aviation facilities. The Burns & McDonnell Fueling Group provides emergency response planning for fuel facilities and fuel farms at airports.

Natural disasters — even those that come with some degree of warning — require careful response planning. Steps can be taken in design and construction to mitigate damage and minimize losses. Devising an appropriate plan is a big step toward keeping your airport or aviation facility intact in the wake of a natural disaster.

Emergency response plans are especially critical for fuel systems and facilities because of the risk they pose during crisis situations.



Airline Deregulation Act is signed into law, removing government control over fares, routes and market entry



Concorde jet flies first supersonic passenger flight

First frequent flier program introduced

2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 15

8/22/11 9:55 AM

Looking to the Future: New Tool Brings Airspace Down to Earth By Robert Crain, AICP, Burns & McDonnell, and Ed Young, Kansas Department of Transportation

U.S. airspace is a complex network of imaginary 3D surfaces. The surfaces can be triangles, trapezoids, conical areas, or any shape imaginable. The areas protected are equally complex, including airports, navigational aids, instrument approaches, military training routes, special use areas and more. Explaining the configuration of airspace in public meetings requires the combined skill set of a high school geometry teacher and a rocket scientist. The mere mention of 3D imaginary surfaces results in an immediate glazing over of eyes. But Airspace Is Important Protection of the airport’s infrastructure requires local government action. Local airport boards, city councils and county commissions must adopt local regulations regarding the protection of their airport. While the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) evaluates all structures, its ability to restrict the placement of a structure is limited. A local understanding of airspace is critical. In 2009, 2,000 airspace cases were determined in Kansas alone. In 2010, there were 2,000 cases before October. The increase in case numbers left Kansas airports vulnerable to determinations that might adversely impact instrument approaches, airport expansions and general airport utility. The lack of information and complexity of airspace resulted in 20 percent of the airspace cases receiving a determination of a “presumed significant hazard.” Even wind farm developers lacked sufficient information to avoid proposing structures in locations that potentially conflicted with airports.

discarded as irrelevant. In many cases, the FAA would simply determine that there was no effect without asking for comment. Even in communities with local regulations, the community could not independently evaluate the FAA’s determination of no significant hazard since many of the resources available to them were useless in evaluating a potential structure. This is the value of the KAAT. From Imaginary to Real Kansas was the first state to create an airspace tool for public use, the Kansas Airspace Awareness Tool (KAAT). The tool visually depicts airspace, converting the imaginary surfaces into a visual layer in Google Earth. Developers can insert structures using precise coordinates and elevations, or they can identify a site on the map to conduct a preliminary analysis. More importantly, local communities can use the tool to protect their airports. Much of the state of Kansas is dependent on air ambulance for medical evacuation. Airspace obstructions can reduce the available runway length which reduces the airport capacity. This can impact important users, such as air ambulances, from accessing a community in a time of need. The FAA’s Notice of Proposed Construction is still required,

In the course of its evaluations, the FAA would circularize presumed hazard cases and request comments. Frequently, the comments sent by the state and the airport would be



Almost half of total flights worldwide took place in the U.S. 16

2011_A&F_special report.indd 16

11,400 air traffic controllers are fired by President Reagan after walking off the job on strike when labor negotiations fail


1993 First ticketless travel becomes available Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:55 AM

but the local community can use the tool to explain the adoption of airspace regulation and justify a determination under local regulations.

a credible participant in the airspace discussion. Ultimately, it helps KDOT protect the millions of dollars in infrastructure and planning in place at Kansas airports.

Burns & McDonnell helped KDOT turn a vision into reality. The KAAT went from concept to reality in less than eight months by utilizing unorthodox testing procedures and innovative outreach and training. The tool is already proving its value for KDOT. The agency has already challenged airspace conflicts using the tool’s output. The KAAT allows Kansas to be

Burns & McDonnell used Google Earth because it enabled the team to “stand up” the state of Kansas airspace and airway system for the KAAT. With Google Earth as the platform, the viewer can see the airport and its associated airspace in 3D, creating a real-time visual representation of the existing landscape.

The web-based KAAT helps everyone visualize the imaginary 3D surfaces that make up the complex network of U.S. airspace.



First airline tickets are sold via the Internet



Boeing produces twin-engine 777, the first aircraft produced via computer-aided design and engineering 2011 Aviation Special Report

Smoking is banned on all domestic flights 17



2011_A&F_special report.indd 17

8/22/11 9:55 AM

Fast Forward: Where Will Technology Take the Passenger Experience? By Ron Crain

We know what the first 100 years of commercial aviation have wrought, and it falls to me to speculate on the next 100. There are numerous conceivable possibilities — some realistic and some not. It is up to us as aviation professionals to identify the good ideas that can lead to more efficient, safe and pleasant experiences for air travel. Some big ideas won’t be realized any time soon. As long as I can remember — from the 1950s, at least — we have been waiting for flying cars. The convenience of flying from your driveway to your parking space at work would be great. But aside from the problem of extreme airspace congestion, the cost of defying gravity is outrageously high. It is doubtful this will happen anytime in this millennium. On the other hand, Virgin Galactic will begin commercial space flights from Spaceport America in the New Mexico desert. Unfortunately, since they won’t accept my frequent flyer miles, I won’t be one of the passengers. Let’s look at some changes in the commercial travel world that could occur. Passenger Processing I fly a lot, but flying is still an anomaly in my life — a process wedged between doing something somewhere and doing something somewhere else. The real job of an airport is to get people from the highway to the airway or vice versa as quickly and efficiently as possible. We refer to this as the passenger experience. There are two extremes on the continuum of passenger experience: make it pass as quickly as possible or make it as enjoyable as possible. I think most passengers prefer the former, and eliminating the waiting and inefficiencies should be our primary goal.



First web-based passenger check-in and online boarding passes 18

2011_A&F_special report.indd 18

Self-service kiosks have been successful additions to the passenger experience.

Self-service ticketing and check-in have been successful programs for most airlines. Some airports and airlines have deployed self-boarding — think barcode scanner on a subway turnstile — and are seeing positive results. Technical challenges with passengers self-tagging bags and common bag drop have been resolved, and the trials are largely successful. Only acceptance from the Transportation Security Administration and remodeling of airport bag intake infrastructure remains. I expect both of these improvements to be widely deployed in the next 10 years. Radio frequency identification (RFID) bag tags are in limited use and will grow slowly. When the number of RFID-capable airports reaches a critical mass, we can expect permanent, durable RFID bag tags or RFID-readable luggage, likely linked to trusted traveler registration. Security I’ve heard recently that terrorists may attempt to transport explosives onto aircraft by surgically implanting the material in their bodies. The contraband cannot be detected by the

Transportation Security Administration established in response to September 11 attacks


2007 Airbus A380 enters commercial service capable of carrying 850 passengers Burns & McDonnell •

8/22/11 9:56 AM


current strip-search viewers. If this type of threat proves to be real, expect another layer of screening technology, further complicating and lengthening the screening process.

at the airport rather than elsewhere. In addition to the standard fare, airport eateries will have new specialty restaurants representing the local flavor — at a higher cost.

Technology alone, however, cannot provide security. Only good intelligence has a chance of protecting us. The buzzphrase for this is risk-based assessment, but it’s really a reconstituted version of passenger profiling. Rather than selecting passengers to undergo additional screening, riskbased assessment eliminates passengers that do not present a threat, allowing resources to be focused on the remainder. With thoughtful implementation, we might have a chance of success using this strategy. In terms of airport design, risk-based assessment could require increased square footage for the screening process and implementation of additional wayfinding and methods to pre-sort passengers for multi-level screening.

Implementation of one-to-one marketing schemes and convenient concourse storefronts will target product offerings to specific passenger preferences as we attempt to extract more dollars between the time the passenger clears screening and boards the plane.

How many of our airports perform in-line bag screening in the bowels of the terminal? This represents one of the most significant threat vectors to our facilities, and terminal planners need to eliminate it. Fortunately, the move to remote baggage check will facilitate consolidation of screening in more isolated and dedicated baggage locations.

The Unpredictable Flight, like steam power before it and the Internet after, was a disruptive technology — a discovery that caused the flow of progress to jump from one path to another. It precipitated a cascade of previously unconcieved ideas. I hope for a new disruptive technology in the air-transport business, particularly in our approach to security. More airport innovation has occurred in past 10 to 15 years than in the previous 80 to 90 years. The possibilities are only limited by our ability to innovate the ultimate passenger experience.

Marketing The amount of money airports can charge airline tenants is near maximum. Increases in the federal Passenger Facility Charge are strongly opposed by airlines because it makes the ticket price appear higher. Consequently, the only revenue growth open to airports comes from from such non-aviation sources as amenities, parking, concessions and advertising. The possibilities are limited only by airport staff creativity. Among the new ideas circulating: medical clinics, pet boarding facilities and laundry drop-off. The goal is to convince passengers it is more convenient to obtain these services


Branson Airport opens; designed by Burns & McDonnell, it is the only privately owned and operated commercial service airport in the U.S.




Airbus announces signing of the largest aircraft deal in history based on aircraft ordered: 200 planes ordered by AirAsia

Transportation Security Administration formally accepts airport scanners 2011 Aviation Special Report




2011_A&F_special report.indd 19


Flying cars may not be imminent, but they’ve been in the collective psyche of the flying public for decades.

8/22/11 9:56 AM

9400 Ward Parkway Kansas City, MO 64114 Phone: 816-333-9400

Keeping Commerce in Flight Over the past century, commercial airports have adapted to the changing needs of complex new aircraft, ever-changing technology and the traveling public. Burns & McDonnell is ready to help you fly into the next.

Our Services

For nearly 70 years, Burns & McDonnell has designed functional, efficient, flexible and cost-effective aviation facilities for clients around the world. Services include program management, master planning, facilities design-build, and environmental planning and design.

Our Experts Specialize In: Aerospace manufacturing Aircraft overhaul and maintenance hangars Airfield design Airport security Airport technology Cargo facilities Central utility plants/combined heat and power plants Control towers Fueling and ramp services Hangars Jet engine maintenance and test facilities Passenger terminals Rental car facilities

For more information, contact: Randy D. Pope, PE 816-822-3231

2011_A&F_special report.indd 20

8/22/11 9:56 AM



n MICHAEL V. RADOMSKI, C.M., SUPERVISOR, AIRPORT OPERATIONS, BALTIMORE/WASHINGTON THURGOOD MARSHALL AIRPORT After four years in the U.S. Marine Corps as an air traffic controller, I knew that was what I wanted to do. After getting out of the Marines, I went to college but was ready to go to FAA as soon as they called. They did call after a year and a half, and I worked the next nine years in busy towers (Hayward, Calif., San Jose and Phoenix Sky Harbor). The PATCO strike was difficult for many of us. I did not want to leave the career to which I had devoted my entire working life. There was no job for me in the U.S., but Australia was in need of air traffic controllers. I applied, and was fortunate to be hired for a threeyear contract. Upon returning to the U.S., I joined FAA’s Contract Tower Program as a controller. After many years in a contract tower, the opportunity to transition into airport management presented itself. At first I felt like a fish out of water, going from knowing everything about my job to knowing almost nothing. Luckily, with a lot of help from my co-workers, I caught on quickly. The skill set required for ATC is the same for airport management. I am fortunate that I was able to transition into a similar profession, and one that offers a constant challenge and professional development. The best part of my second career is the privilege of working with a team of highly talented and dedicated operations managers and all the other airport workers who are invaluable to the success of our airport.

n GARY SCHMIDT, C.M., DIRECTOR OF RELIEVER AIRPORTS, METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION (MAC), MINN. When I graduated from the University of Minnesota in 1974, I was on crutches because of reconstructive surgery on my knee. No one was going to hire anyone in that condition.


As luck would have it, though, I passed the Civil Service exam for controllers, and was given a hire date in the fall of that year. The job was intense, but it offered gratification from the immediate feedback of knowing you had made the right decision — “saving lives,” as my mentors would say. After the PATCO strike in 1981, I got lucky again. I was hired in 1983 by MAC as an operations technician. It may have been the lowest rung on the ladder, but I was back in aviation, and it was a job that would lead to other opportunities. Over time, I became an assistant manager, manager, and now director of reliever airports for MAC. I now have one of the most interesting jobs at MAC because I deal with almost every airport issue imaginable. No two days are alike, and never is there is dull day. I’m thankful for the information, training and networking that AAAE affords its members. It has been immensely helpful over the years — particularly the networking that gives immediate access to expertise or a different perspective when dealing with a difficult issue. In fact, the networking opportunities reconnected me with Bruce Carter, someone I had spoken to on the direct communication lines for years as an air traffic controller. AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011


‘Since I was one of the youngest “retirees” as a result of the PATCO strike (age 23 at the time), I was considered a prime candidate to return to air traffic control .... But when FAA outlined the terms and conditions of returning to air traffic, it was obvious to me that airport management offered the greater challenges and opportunities.’ n PAUL SICHKO, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR– OPERATIONS, MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Immediately after the PATCO strike and during the appeal process, I worked in private athletic club management. When all appeals were exhausted, I sought job opportunities that would bring me back to the aviation industry. I was hired by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) in the fall of 1989, and took a position in airside operations at MinneapolisSt. Paul International (MSP). I have found my air traffic control background essential in developing and fostering what we at MAC believe is one of the finest working relationships in the country between an airport operator and local air traffic control. I have been twice recognized by FAA during my MAC employment. Along with two MSP controllers and a MAC colleague, in 1995 I was awarded FAA’s National Outstanding Flight Assist Award. I was also fortunate to have received an Airport Partnership Award in 2009 for work associated with FAA’s Takeoff and Landing Performance Assessment Aviation Rulemaking Committee. Since I was one of the youngest “retirees” as a result of the PATCO strike (age 23 at the time), I was considered a prime candidate to return to air traffic control when the Clinton Administration reversed President Reagan’s Executive Order that banned striking controllers from reemployment. But when FAA outlined the terms and conditions of returning to air traffic, it was obvious to me that airport management offered the greater challenges and opportunities. I declined their offer, and remained with MAC.

n ROBERT J. UHRICH A.A.E., DIRECTOR OF AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT, SAVANNAH/HILTON HEAD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT After August of 1981, I was employed by a number of charter carriers from 1982-1995. Duties over the years included aircraft dispatch, operations, crew scheduling and charter sales. I arrived in Savannah in 1991 as the vice president of sales for Key Airlines. Key and the airport partnered in a unique hub and spoke operation to leisure destinations. Flights originated in New York, Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Chicago 30


and Atlanta. After arriving in Savannah, the aircraft continued to Cancun, Montego Bay, Nassau, Orlando, Freeport and St. Thomas. On the return, all passengers cleared customs and continued on to one of the six base markets. While it was an innovative concept, it failed in 1993. In an effort to allow my children to start and finish the same high school, I then commuted to Atlanta for two years while I worked for two separate charter airlines. In 1995, tiring of the commute, I met with Patrick Graham, A.A.E., executive director of Savannah/ Hilton Head International, to discuss a full time position as the airport’s air service director.

n ROBERT H. WORKING, A.A.E., RETIRED MANAGER OF EVANSVILLE (IND.) REGIONAL AIRPORT At the time of the strike, I was in Columbus, Ga., working in FAA’s Radar Approach Control facility. I had been in Columbus for about five and one-half years before the strike. I think only a few of the controllers felt that the government would really terminate more than 11,000 of us in three days. Actually, we were told we would be fired but would be rehired back in a week or two. Soon after the strike, I went to work for a friend grinding up hog feed in Smiths, Ala. The pay was minimal, but I was working with a friend and was appreciated. Later that winter, I tried my hand at sales, but it just wasn’t my cup of tea. Gary Jackson, the airport manager in Columbus, would let me come to his office every few weeks to check in the AAAE newsletter for job openings. In the summer, there was a job opening for the assistant airport manager position in Evansville, Ind. Col. James Stapleton was the Evansville airport manager at the time, and I was fortunate that Jim took a chance on a fired controller. When Jim retired in 1986, I was promoted to the manager’s position and held that until my retirement from Evansville last year. There aren’t many times I don’t reflect on my ATC career when I hear the guys working in the tower. It is a career I regret losing. It was one I enjoyed, and yet I did what I felt I had to do and was able to survive. I have great empathy for controllers today and wish them the very best. A

Creating Value ...

Naviga ng successfully through a challenging funding environment requires innovative, sustainable and cost-effective solutions. Baker is prepared to help you navigate.

... Delivering Solutions Creang value by delivering innovave and sustainable soluons for infrastructure and the environment. For more informaon about Baker’s comprehensive aviaon services, contact: George Perinis, R.A., Sr. VP at 412.269.6322 or Ken Holt, VP at 803.231.3820 or


2020 VISION PLAN: Cleared for Takeoff By Ben Thielemier


t Little Rock National Airport, passengers soon will experience the beginning of a major overhaul that, when complete, will make travel through Arkansas’s largest airport more convenient and comfortable. The two-phase 2020 Vision Plan, as it currently is designed, will improve every aspect of the airport, including the passenger arrival and check-in process, security and screening, terminal capacity and appeal, airport communications and energy efficiency. Airport Executive Director Ron Mathieu said that many challenges come with extending the life of a terminal that was constructed in the 1970s and designed for 400,000 enplanements. Nearly 40 years old, the terminal now accommodates 2.4 million passengers annually, a number that is expected to continue growing. “With the positive business climate that Arkansas has developed and the recent location of many national and international firms to our state, including Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard, Welspun and others, Little Rock National Airport is the gateway to the region, welcoming new jobs and future economic development,” Mathieu said. That’s a 32


statement similar to those made by Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe and Little Rock Mayor Mark Stodola at the November 2010 groundbreaking for Phase 1 of the 2020 Vision Plan. Since June 2008, when Mathieu was named the airport’s executive director, he and his staff have worked to ensure that the facility is positioned properly to fund the $53.6 million Phase 1 project and to prepare it financially for the planned $175 million Phase 2. “I call it getting our financial house in order,” Mathieu remarked. “These are big, forward-thinking projects that the municipal airport commission is undertaking, and we don’t want to get ahead of ourselves.” Now, he said, the airport is ready to begin.

NO DEBT REQUIRED Through a combination of PFC revenue, federal stimulus dollars, and more than $4.3 million in cash, Phase 1 of the 2020 Vision Plan requires no debt, and no new taxes or additional costs to airlines or passengers, a factor the airport commission finds most appealing. “Through innovative business practices, aggressive grant acquisition and some careful planning, Ron

was able to increase our revenue stream while keeping us competitive,” said Commissioner Bob East, the 2010 chair of the airport commission. “Now we are able to talk about putting up $4.3 million from our net revenues for the Phase 1 improvements, something that we would not have been able to do without good financial management.” Mathieu also noted that in 2010 the airport earned a record $8 million in net revenues, which positioned it to move forward with Phase 1 of the 2020 Vision Plan. Phase 1 of the terminal redevelopment program began in November 2010 with a focus on a new baggage screening system that will improve the passenger check-in process and increase the amount of ticket lobby space. Mathieu noted, “Currently, the four cumbersome baggage screening machines in the ticket lobby serve as visual eyesores and cause congestion and passenger flow issues. To alleviate these problems, a new 31,500-square-foot baggage matrix building will be added to house three advanced inline screening machines and all the baggage handling operations. New curbside bag check facilities also will be a notable feature of this new, more efficient system.” With an abundance of space created by the new baggage matrix building, the ticketing lobby will receive a complete renovation with customer service amenities at the forefront of the planning process. The lobby also will contain the infrastructure for more modern technology such as self-service

ticketing systems and new flight information displays. Passengers will continue to enjoy new amenities as they make their way up the escalators to the second floor where an expanded passenger screening checkpoint will replace the current fourlane configuration. The increased space will house five screening positions, including two of TSA’s Advanced Imaging Technology machines, to help reduce queue times while increasing security. Once through the security checkpoint, passengers will be greeted with several improvements along the 12-gate concourse, including the renovation of the existing restrooms. To accommodate passenger needs, electronic recharging stations will be added to gate holdrooms. Mathieu noted that the airport currently offers free wireless Internet throughout the terminal in response to business travelers requesting access while waiting for their flights.

IMPROVED CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE The overall result of these common-area improvements, which total nearly $35 million of the $53.6 million cost for Phase 1, will be a significantly enhanced customer experience, Mathieu said. “We all know that the areas that passengers are able to see encompass only a small portion of what makes the airport run,” he added. Included in the new baggage matrix building is space for administrative offices to expand. Part of the behind-the-scenes improvements already being AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011


The terminal’s common-area improvements, which total nearly $35 million of the $53.6 million cost for Phase 1, will be a significantly enhanced customer experience, Mathieu said. “We all know that the areas that passengers are able to see encompass only a small portion of what makes the airport run,” he added.



made are in the staff offices, including multiple information technology upgrades for accounting, purchasing, billing and planning. Tom Clarke, C.M., the airport’s director of properties, planning and development, said these improvements, similar to the planned baggage screening and security checkpoint upgrades, are extremely important to improve efficiency and data flow. He noted that a new state-of-the-art Com-Net Multi-User Flight Information Display System is already operational throughout the airport. The latest in security and communications equipment, including fire, intrusion and building control systems, will be integrated into an expanded Communications Control Center (CCC). The CCC also will house a closedcircuit television system to provide further enhancements in security and airport monitoring. Pulling all these systems together into a central location is another attempt to make airport operations more coordinated and efficient.

Clarke also pointed to the airport’s environmentally conscious decision to invest $9 million in energy efficient system upgrades that will save the airport an estimated $650,000 in annual energy costs over the 10-year return on investment. Commissioner East said that every improvement in Phase 1 will translate into benefits in Phase 2. In fact, the launch of Phase 1 was idled for a time to ensure that the airport’s overall vision was fully conceptualized, he said. This allowed phases 1 and 2 to be properly integrated, creating an end product that will be a complete statement of what Little Rock National Airport is to the community. A Editor’s Note: A video of the overall 2020 Vision Plan for Little Rock National Airport, including phases 1 and 2, can be found at the 2020 Vision Plan website, Ben Thielemier is a business writer and editor. He may be reached at

• Airfield Analysis and Planning • Airport Business and Financial Services • Airspace Analysis and Planning • Credit Rating Support • Environmental Services • Forecasting • General Advisory Services • Land Use and Development Planning • Landside Planning • Management Support Services • Noise Analyses • Operations Research

Ricondo & ASSOCIATES, INC. From Great Companies Come Great Ideas

RICONDO & ASSOCIATES, INC., an Aviation Consultancy

3873 - Centerlines half-page Ricondo ad.indd 1

• Regulatory Assistance • Strategic Planning • Terminal and Facilities Planning •

an equal opportunity employer


Biometrics in Airport Access Control: Looking to the Future By Cathy Tilton


ince the events of 9/11, the report by The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, and the passage of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001 (ATSA), numerous efforts have been made to improve the security of our nation’s airports. These security enhancements have been centered around access control. TSA’s Airport Access Control Pilot Program evaluated the use of a variety of technologies, including state-of-the-art video surveillance, radio frequency identification (RFID) and biometrics as part of the requirements of ATSA. In parallel, and as directed by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, TSA issued the Biometrics for Airport Access Control Guidance Package and established an associated qualified products list (QPL). The initial set of products qualified by testing laboratory IBG in 2007 consisted of four fingerprint-based biometric readers (a fifth was added later) designed for indoor operation. TSA stated, “Airport operators are encouraged to use the qualified products list to improve upon their existing access control systems by incorporating biometrics technologies.” In addition, the Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) program, which is managed by TSA, imposes access control requirements for regulated maritime facilities and vessels. TSA has developed TWIC smart card and reader specifications, along with an associated access control reader product list, stemming from requirements in the SAFE Port Act of 2006. To date, this program has completed its initial capability evaluation (ICE) and tested 11 fixed, 18 portable and two non-TWIC operational biometric readers. Pilot testing of these readers has been performed at four 36


ports. In the future, the ICE list is to be replaced by a Qualified Technology List that currently is being coordinated between TSA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology to coincide with the publication of the final rule for TWIC that will be issued by the Coast Guard. To date, more than 1.7 million TWIC cards have been issued. It is difficult to discuss access control separately from credentialing. Although it initially was envisioned that the TWIC program would encompass airports, so far no interoperable credential has been specified for the aviation sector.

TSA’s Aviation Credential Interoperability Solution concept, which was issued as a draft specification in 2008, is not an active program at the agency. AAAE, however, continues to take the lead in defining such a credential and the associated framework through the Biometric Airport Security Identification Consortium (BASIC), which addresses security and interoperability while providing flexibility and local control to airports. To date, dozens of airports have participated in the BASIC early adopter pilots. In 2008, the Smart Card Alliance issued a white

paper entitled Interoperable Identity Credentials for the Air Transport Industry, and RTCA issued DO-230B, Integrated Security System Standard for Airport Access Control (recently updated to DO-230C to align with the new version of the Recommended Security Guidelines for Airport Planning, Design and Construction, issued by TSA in 2011). The RTCA recommendations are expected to be a key reference document in future airport access control solicitations. So where is all of this leading us? How are biometrics being used today, and how will they be used in the future? Nearly 40 percent of airports that responded to a recent AAAE survey reported having some type of biometric already in place as part of their badging and access control systems, with most of these systems based on fingerprints. This is in addition to those fingerprints required for background screening purposes. When it comes to access control, a few basic technology choices are available: • PIN pad • Basic badge (e.g., mag stripe, RFID and others) • Smartcard (contact or contactless) • Biometrics • Combination of the above Given that an employee badge is required in any event, and as airports are moving toward more secure badges, it seems logical that this badge would be used as a credential within the physical access control system, rather than having two separate cards or using either a PIN or biometric alone. When moving from a basic badge to a smartcard, there is a cost impact, both for the badges themselves and also for the door readers. Technology choices need to be made as well, such as: • Should contact or contactless cards/readers be used? • Should biometrics be stored on card or, alternatively, be used with the card, and, if so, how? • Should Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) be implemented, and if so, how? • What level of interoperability is required and what standards/specifications should be applied? Operationally, contactless technologies are preferred for ease of use. For interoperability, there is support for use of the Personal Identity Verification-Interoperable (PIV-I) for non-federal issuers. However, PIV (per FIPS 201, the Federal Information Processing Standard Publication 201, AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011





Purpose Fitting

Use of the right biometric for the function at hand.

One biometric for background check, another for access control.


Maximizing the population that can be enrolled/participate.

One person fails to enroll in iris while another has poor quality prints.


Accommodating situations where a given biometric is temporarily unavailable.

Lawn mower incident results in bandaged hand.


Reducing error rates (particularly for large databases).

Reducing false match or false non-match rate by an order of magnitude.


Increasing security levels and resistance to attack through multi-factor.

Anti-spoofing improved by adding second modality.

a federal government standard that specifies PIV requirements for federal employees and contractors) currently does not allow use of biometrics across the contactless interface. This is the reason that both TWIC and the previous Registered Traveler programs deviated from this specification. Having said that, the draft FIPS 201-2 does allow for biometric match-on-card across the contactless interface. (Comments on the draft FIPS 201-2 closed on June 6.) Some argue that once the needed security is in place to allow this, other

previously precluded functions should also be considered (i.e., biometric match-off card). Such security mechanisms imply cryptography. Going a step further and adding digital certificates further adds to cost and complexity of bringing “PKI to the door.� Coming back to biometrics, if you have a secure card, what do biometrics add? Proponents argue that biometrics link the individual to the card, enabling verification that the person using the card is the person to whom it was issued and the per-

Trusted Whether your project is airside, landside, commercial, military, or GA, you can count on Kimley-Horn to provide the best in service and satisfaction. To learn more, contact or call Loy Warren at (972) 770-1376. 38


son who was screened. Further, if biometrics are being collected for screening purposes, could a process not be envisioned to integrate these activities such that biometrics are collected once for both screening/background check and badging/physical access purposes? How reliable are biometrics? Are they really ready for prime time? Reliability encompasses several properties: Accuracy. Biometric accuracy is characterized by false match and false non-match rates. These error rates vary by modality (fingerprint, iris, face) and vendor/product. Products that meet the requirements of the guidance package (which are the same as the PIV requirements — 1 percent equal error rate, which is the point at which false match rate and false non-match rate are equal) should be suitable for use, although many products exceed this performance and can be fine-tuned to favor one type of error over another. This is the classic security versus convenience trade-off.

Availability. The overall system uptime must meet operational requirements, including the failure rate of the biometric sensors/devices. Sensors should be selected to meet the requirements of the environment and usage scenario. Neither the airport access control QPL nor the TWIC ICE evaluations include environmental testing at this time.

interface and population coverage, but the primary metric for biometrics is the failure to enroll rate (FTE). The guidance package requires an FTE of less than 3 percent. Fortunately, biometric technology and systems have matured over the past few years and have become quite reliable when properly implemented and operated. Of critical importance is that the technology selected matches the requirements, particularly with respect to the target application, users and environment. A trend in biometrics in general is the use of multi-modal biometrics. How might this apply to the airport access control domain? Wouldn’t this just add cost without significant benefit? The primary benefits of a multi-biometric solution are shown in the chart on the previous page. In the future, access control systems may evolve into the need for a full identity management capability. There is also a slowly growing movement toward the convergence of physical and logical access control, the first step of which may be a dual-use credential. Passengers aside, identity verification is becoming more and more important. The question that remains, however: In this era of belt-tightening, are we up to the challenge? A Cathy Tilton is vice president for standards and emerging technologies at Daon, a provider of identity assurance software products. She may be

Usability. The area of usability includes ergonomics, user

reached at

Maximum speed and precision for mission-critical surveillance?

That’s easy.

Read more with your smartphone

Managing security for mission-critical sites is complex, to say the least. Your cameras need to handle anything and everything. Without fail.

supreme control, speed and precision. So nothing escapes your attention. Zero hassle. Total control. Easy choice.

Axis’ Q-line pan/tilt/zoom cameras give you the market’s most advanced network video surveillance solutions — with intuitive installation, reliable operation and smart technologies for

Get the Axis picture. Stay one step ahead. Visit

AXIS Q60 PTZ Dome Network Camera Series • Up to HDTV 1080p video quality • WDR • High-speed pan and tilt • Up to 35x optical zoom • High PoE • Arctic Temperature Control • IP-rated protection


For Passengers, Going Mobile Means Mobile Web By Sean Broderick


ot long ago, airports safely could assume that most people searching online for travel information did so via a computer. Those days are almost gone, courtesy of the smartphone. The convenience of customers carrying the Internet in their pockets opens up opportunities for airports and other travel service providers. It also sets the bar higher. “What it does is put a higher premium on having relevant information available all down the line,” said Mike Benjamin, president of FlightView, which provides flight information, mobile websites and other services to airports and airlines. In a perfect world, Benjamin said, airports would offer both mobile websites and dedicated apps and let passengers choose. But apps are expensive to develop, and they must be customized for each mobile platform. While seemingly everyone has a smartphone, the market from a developer’s point of view is quite segmented. According to digital trends tracker comScore, Google and Apple lead the way in the U.S., with market shares of 38.1 percent and 26.6 percent, respectively. BlackBerry maker RIM is third with 24.7 percent. Put another way, two apps will get you, at most, 61 percent of the market — and every update would have to be made twice. This is one big reason airports are focusing on mobile versions of their websites, which



are cheaper to build and require just one version to cover most smartphones, rather than the more functional custom apps. “With limited resources, most [airports] have to make a choice on what comes first,” said Benjamin. Harrisburg (Pa.) International recently went through the exercise as part of a full website overhaul. “Working with a small budget required me to consider all of the mobile options available and choose the most cost-effective and scalable solution,” explained Stephanie Gehman, marketing manager at Harrisburg International. “I found a mobile site to be our best option, as we could easily grow and scale the mobile site to our needs without having the cost of changing multiple instances (platforms) of an airport app. While apps are great tools, they were not the best fit for [our] needs or budget.” Creating a mobile site is more than simply making existing web content fit on a small screen. It also means providing only the information that a traveler on the move really needs, Benjamin explained. Items at the top of the list include basic flight arrival and departure information and directories of restaurants and stores. Next comes nice-to-have content like terminal maps and parking information. The “skip it” category includes general news and business information that travelers don’t need. “It’s not important [for travelers] to know what contracts are out to bid or the history of the airfield,” Benjamin said. Harrisburg, which is developing its mobile

“I found a mobile site to be our best option, as we could easily grow and scale the mobile site to our needs without having the cost of changing multiple instances (platforms) of an airport app. While apps are great tools, they were not the best fit for [our] needs or budget.” site, will rely on Google Analytics data from its website to dictate its mobile content, Gehman explained. “I know the pages most heavily trafficked by our site visitors, and those will be the content of the mobile version of our site.” Another big point: not all airport mobile site users are travelers. “It’s easy when you’re thinking about these to be thinking about just the traveler,” Benjamin pointed out. “But at least as many users are the ones related to the traveler — the meeters and greeters, ground transportation providers, and so on.” In other words, arrival information should include not just a time and gate, but also details ASSA.Airport.Bleed:Layout 1 area 1/14/09 PM Page such as baggage claim and, if3:11 applicable, the1

disembarkation terminal. Choosing the right content is key to a useful mobile site, but even perfect content will suffer under poor functionality. As a rule, less is better, for everything from colors to content, Benjamin noted. Two or three colors will provide plenty of pop on a smartphone screen. Long lists, such as a concessionaire directory, should be broken into different pages accessed via obvious links — it’s usually easier for a traveler on the move to tap a screen or click a button than scroll, Benjamin said. Sean Broderick is AAAE’s manager, public relations and communications. He may be reached at

The time is right for you to make an intelligent choice with ASSA electromechanical access control systems. We make intelligent, flexible and high security lock systems possible. ASSA C4™ CLIQ™ is an intelligent lock system that combines the best of design and electronics in the smartest possible manner. Each key can easily be upgraded or tailormade to suit any situation or need. Since every key has its own identity, it becomes the “personal property” of the key holder. The mechanical design of the key allows you to create different security zones much in the same manner as a conventional mechanical lock system. Electronic programming of the keys gives you the option to authorize individuals or to a group of individuals and more. The basic idea of this technology is to create an intelligent security system. That means a lock system that retains a high level of security despite upgrading, alterations or expansion. Even after many years of use by a continual flow of new tenants, new employees or changes occurring in the workplace, the level of security will remain the same. ASSA, Inc. 110 Sargent Drive P.O. Box 9453 New Haven, CT 06534-0453

Contact Us: Phone: 800-235-7482 Fax: 800-892-3256





DFW’s RAC Refunding A Success By Christopher A. Poinsatte


n 1998, Dallas-Fort Worth International (DFW) decided to construct a rent-a-car (RAC) facility on the south side of the airport to consolidate all car rental companies into one building and operate a common bus fleet between the terminals and the new facility. This was the first consolidated RAC facility financed in the U.S. based solely on consolidated facility fees supported by market demand for rental car transactions at an airport. Today, the consolidated rental car facility is a 1.38 millionsquare-foot, two-story facility, located on 145 acres. It contains 4,300 ready/return parking spaces and has nine rental car companies with 10 brands operating from the facility, with a total available inventory of 25,000 cars. In 2010, 4.2 million rental car transaction days were generated. DFW management decided to use its Facility Improvement Corp. (FIC) as a conduit to finance the construction of the facility and the required bus fleet. The FIC’s board of directors is comprised of DFW executives. The FIC was created in the early 1990s and was the conduit for numerous tax-exempt financings for various airport tenants, but it never had been used to finance an airport improvement such as a new RAC. To finance the RAC, the FIC in 1998 initially issued $140 million of taxable bonds. The bonds were secured by a daily Customer Facility Charge (CFC), collected by the RAC companies under the terms of a facility agreement between the FIC and each of the RAC companies. The revenue from the charge was remitted to a trustee in accordance with the trust indenture. The amount of the CFC was originally designed to “float,” based on an



annual study by a rate consultant. The bonds originally were insured by the financial services company MBIA. The structure of the transaction included a debt service coverage account and a mechanism to capture additional revenues to provide a cushion on fluctuations of future revenues, known as the surplus reserve account. A second series of taxable bonds was issued in 1999 in the amount of $19.6 million to complete the facility and purchase 40 buses. As a condition to selling this second series of bonds with MBIA insurance and achieving the same underlying ratings, the FIC had to establish additional debt service reserves and to agree that the CFC would remain at $3 per transaction day until all reserves were fully funded. The final maturity date of the taxable bonds was Nov. 1, 2024. The facility opened in April 2000 during an economic downturn, and transaction days did not meet the forecast during the first year of operations. This was further compounded by the events of 9/11, which caused an additional decrease in transaction days. This required the FIC to amend the trust indenture, with agreement from the RAC companies, to increase the CFC to $4 per transaction day. The number of transaction days grew to a peak of 5 million in 2005 as the economy improved. This allowed the FIC to fully fund all of the reserve funds. The FIC then decided, by agreement with the RAC companies, to fix the CFC at $4 rather than allowing it to float. The residual fund, which is where all excess revenues from the CFC accumulate, had a balance in excess of $25 million by the end of 2008. The original agreements required the RAC companies to replace the bus fleet, which had grown to 46 vehicles; and by 2008, the buses were near retirement age. Knowing that the FIC residual fund had a balance of $25 million, the RAC companies proposed that the FIC use those funds to purchase new buses. In addition, the RAC companies wanted DFW to institute a Customer Transportation Charge to cover the operating and maintenance costs of the bus fleet. The FIC agreed to the RAC companies’ request with the provision that the CFC would remain in place once the bonds were retired and that the FIC could use “excess CFC funds” at its discretion for other non-airline projects on the airport. Excess CFC funds were defined as any cash available

Thanks to the strong underlying credit and DFW’s name recognition in the market, the offering was four times oversubscribed by investors consisting primarily of money managers and insurance companies.

were priced at par with coupons ranging from 0.35 percent to 4.442 percent, carried an Allin True Interest Cost of 3.76 percent, and had an average life of 6.3 years. The transaction was closed on June 30, 2011. Morgan Keegan served as the senior manager on the transaction with Morgan Stanley serving as co-senior. First Southwest Co. and Estrada Hinojosa & Co. were co-financial advisors. These Joint Revenue Bonds were issued to refund $112.1 million of the outstanding Series 1998 and 1999 FIC Taxable Rental Car Facility Charge Revenue Bonds. The issuance of these bonds resulted in total debt service savings in excess of $36 million and a net present value savings in excess of $24 million (21.5 percent). The final maturity was reduced from Nov. 1, 2024, to Nov. 1, 2021. Most importantly, this transaction also allowed the FIC immediate access to approximately $20 million of cash from the FIC’s debt service reserve and residual funds, and access to an additional estimated $20 million to $25 million of excess CFC funds over the next 10 years, after providing for the purchase of future buses and RAC facility needs. Once the bonds are retired in November 2021, the FIC will be generating excess CFC funds of an estimated $20 million per year. These excess CFC funds may be retained by the FIC and granted to the airport and used for any lawful purpose, except airfield or terminal improvements benefiting the airlines. Alternatively, the FIC Board may decide to lower the $4 CFC.

after the FIC purchased buses and made necessary capital improvements to the RAC facility. The FIC considered refunding the bonds at that time, but the market conditions did not justify issuing taxable FIC/CFC revenue bonds. DFW management decided in late 2010 to refund the existing FIC/RAC bonds using DFW Airport Joint Revenue Bonds rather than FIC/CFC bonds for two reasons: (1) to achieve lower interest rates and higher levels of savings; and (2) to obtain access to the significant cash balances locked-up in the FIC. By using DFW bonds, the airport was able to leverage its A+/A1/A+ credit rating rather than the FIC’s RAC ratings of BBB+/Baa1/A- by Fitch, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, respectively. It also allowed DFW to pledge all of its gross revenues for the repayment of the bonds. As part of this refunding, the airport and the FIC entered into a facility agreement, whereby the FIC would make monthly transfers of CFCs in an amount necessary for DFW to pay debt service and coverage on the refunding bonds. This refunding was approved by DFW’s signatory airlines because it had no impact on the airline rate base, and DFW agreed to use its discretionary capital account if PFCs were not sufficient to cover debt service. Eleven airport issuers, including DFW, have issued stand-alone rental car bonds backed only by CFCs. DFW is the first to change the security and refund its stand-alone bonds on a senior lien basis, as Airport Joint Revenue Bonds. On June 20, 2011, DFW priced $111.4 million of Taxable Series 2011A DFW Airport Revenue Refunding Bonds. Christopher A. Poinsatte is executive vice president and chief The deal was supposed to price the following financial officer for Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. He day; however, because of good market conditions may be reached at and high investor interest, DFW elected to price a day early. Thanks to the strong 2010 DELTA AIRPORT underlying credit and DFW’s CONSULTANTS, INC. Best Civil Engineering Firm To Work For 2010 name recognition in the market, the offering was four times  Planning oversubscribed by investors  Environmental consisting primarily of money  Engineering managers and insurance  Construction companies. This oversubscription Administration led to a tightening of yields throughout all maturities and  Program lower interest cost for the airport. Management The refunding bonds were issued  Architecture as serial bonds, with a final maturity of 2021. The bonds AIRPORTMAGAZINE.NET | AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2011



Back from the Brink: The Resurgence of Harris County Airport Not long ago, Harris County Airport in Pine Mountain, Ga., existed as a no-frills, rural general aviation airport without a plan for growth. The airfield was operated by a private entity and only received basic maintenance. Air traffic was light, and there was a very real danger of the facility closing. “We knew the airport property was privately donated many years ago, and there was a unique reversion clause to deed the property back to the original owners if the airport ever closed,” said Harry Lange, chairman of the airport commission. The revelation that the county could lose not only the airport but also the acreage that encompassed it set the commission on a path to take over and revive the facility. “The commission knew the continuation of the airport would be a key for future economic development within the county,” said Lange. Once discussions about the airport’s future became a priority, the commission began to leverage the wealth of amenities in the geographic region and what they meant for economic growth. Pine Mountain is a tourism hotbed. In close proximity to the airport are popular attractions such as Callaway Gardens, Warm Springs and F.D. Roosevelt State Park. These attractions, along with convenient access to Interstate 185, were the catalyst needed to promote the airport’s resurgence. The commission then set about hiring a new engineering firm to help create a vision for turning the underutilized airport into a powerful economic asset for the county. The firm of WK Dickson & Co., Inc. was selected and, with the support of both the

Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and FAA, the team was in place to improve the facility. “When we first started to engage the county commission, I could see how eagerly they wanted this facility to succeed. There was a focus that the airport could be made into something special, and their enthusiasm played a big part in getting things moving again,” said Phil Eberly, project manager for WK Dickson. Through an open and systematic process, the plan for the future quickly began to take shape. WK Dickson and the county commission were active participants in the planning process at both the state and federal levels. Work on the project began in the fall of 2005. The improvements that can be seen today were funded largely by FAA and GDOT with a small local match from the county. Improvements include fresh asphalt on the 5,002-foot runway, an expanded apron area, a new fuel farm in place with 12,000-gallon tanks for avgas and Jet A, and a self-serve unit to help pilots buy fuel 24 hours a day. County Manager Danny Bridges remarked, “The self-service fuel has already brought a greater number of planes to the airport just to refuel. With this feature, pilots can refuel after the airport is closed; they are aware they can purchase fuel whenever they choose.” Additionally, the airport recently completed its first 10-space T-hangar, which already is filled to capacity. The terminal building also has been renovated to reflect the updated look of the airport. With the airport now on target to reach its potential, the county hosted an open house in September 2010 for the community, and feedback by local citizens has been overwhelmingly positive for the facility. Harris County Airport, whose existence was very much in doubt just a few years ago, now has a bright future. During the Georgia Airports Association Annual Conference in the fall of 2010, Lange accepted the association’s 2010 General Aviation Project of the Year award. For more information, go to




HMSHost Unveils B4YouBoard Mobile App At JFK


MSHost has joined the ranks of companies offering smartphone apps to provide new customer services. The concessionaire in May began offering a mobile food ordering app called B4YouBoard for travelers passing through JFK’s Terminal 3. Currently available for iPhones from Apple’s App Store, B4YouBoard allows passengers to order a meal from Balducci’s Food Lover’s Market or Chili’s Too, pay for the meal using a smartphone, and have the meal delivered directly to them at the gate. Meals also may be picked up at a dedicated B4YouBoard kiosk. The service offers a variety of appetizers, sandwiches and salads. When a traveler places the order, selecting one of the six areas within the terminal where in-person delivery is available, the order is transmitted directly to the kitchen/order system. A series of



messages will be emailed to the traveler providing status updates on the order. The last message will provide details about where the traveler can find the HMSHost B4YouBoard delivery person in the gate area. The service requires 20 minutes from time of order to delivery. A traveler who wishes to change an order may call the “Assistance” line by pressing the appropriate button within the app. The service is available seven days a week from noon to 8 p.m. Payment for meals is by credit card, entered on the phone through a secure payment channel. As of late July, HMSHost reported approximately 1,000 downloads and meals ordered through the program. While the mobile app pilot program initially is available for iPhone users only, it is expected

For answers, answers, visit visit Siemens Siemens booth booth #442. #442. Each Each visit visit to to the the Siemens Siemens booth booth helps helps donate donate $10 $10 to to Philabundance, Philabundance, For Philadelphia's largest hunger relief organization. Philadelphia's largest hunger relief organization. For answers, visit Siemens at Totalcontribution contributionby bySiemens Siemensto toPhilabundance Philabundancein inPhiladelphia Philadelphianot notto toexceed exceed$5,000 $5,000in inthe theaggregate. aggregate. Each Eachvisitor visitordenotes denotesone oneattendee attendeebadge badgeswipe. swipe. Duplicate Duplicatebadge badgeswipes swipesare arenot noteligible. eligible. Total


Retail Briefs The Phoenix City Council unanimously approved the recommended proposal by Host International for the first of two new food and beverage contracts for Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport’s Terminal 4. Host International was chosen based on food and beverage concepts, financial return to the city, management and operations plan, design/quality of tenant improvements, and experience and qualifications. Renovation of the Terminal 4 food and beverage areas will begin in January 2012. The new concepts will open in phases through mid–2013 on both sides of security. Concepts include Paradise Bakery & Café; NYPD Pizza; Sir Veza’s Taco Garage; la Madeleine; Cartel Coffee Lab; McDonald’s; Press Express; El Bravo; Sauce; Blanco’s Tacos & Tequila; Modern Burger; Olive & Ivy Marketplace; LGO Burger; LGO Deli; LGO Pizzeria & Grateful Spoon Gelato; Chelsea’s Kitchen; D’licious Dishes; Barrio Café; Cowboy Ciao; and Starbuck’s. …

CareHere clinic, a retail health care clinic and wellness store, has opened at Nashville International Airport. The store handles common and chronic health concerns for travelers, and addresses the everyday health care needs of travelers and onsite employees. … Blackhawks Restaurant opened recently at Chicago O’Hare International. Located post-security, the new restaurant is a joint effort between HMSHost Corp. and the Chicago Blackhawks. Reminiscent of neighborhood establishments where fans gathered to cheer on the home team, the Chicago O’Hare Blackhawks Restaurant features menu items from locally known Stanley’s Kitchen & Tap, as well as beer on tap, wines by the glass and premium cocktails. … Hudson Group has opened the first free-

to be available for Android users in the near future. HMSHost also plans to roll out the B4YouBoard program to additional airports in 2011. Minneapolis/St. Paul International is slated to be the next airport to gain the mobile app, with introduction expected in early fall 2011. HMSHost said the restaurants that will offer fare through the app still are being finalized, but likely will include two or three restaurants in a couple of different concourses initially. B4YouBoard recently was selected by Apple from among 15,000 travel apps as one of 120 top apps for the company’s “What’s Hot” list. HMSHost partnered with Arlington, Va.-based technology developer Airside Mobile to launch B4YouBoard on Airside’s mobile transaction platform, which was developed specifically for airport services. Airside’s technology is designed to let passengers order, reserve, and pay for meals, retail items, and premium services at the airport — rapidly and securely from smartphones. 48


standing Juicy Couture airport store in New York’s John F. Kennedy International. The 700-square-foot store is located adjacent to Hudson’s Tumi luggage shop in British Airways Terminal 7. Hudson will operate the JFK store under a licensing agreement with Juicy Couture. … Airmall USA, operator of the Airmall at Baltimore/ Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, announced the opening of two new passenger service concessions. Providing relaxation and beauty services, Be Relax has opened a 275-square-foot store on Concourse A and a 1,125-square-foot store on Concourse D. In addition, a 504-square-foot Jamba Juice, offering healthy beverages and snacks on the go, has opened in the Concourse A/B food court. … Delaware North Companies

Travel Hospitality Services announced the opening of Red Mango in the pre-security area of Terminal 3 at Fort LauderdaleHollywood International. Operated by local airport concession disadvantaged business enterprise operator Cann Services Inc., Red Mango offers all-natural nonfat frozen yogurt.

AAAE Student Chapters Participate in Atlanta Annual Conference By Steve Adams, A.A.E. Chair, AAAE Academic Relations Committee


his year’s AAAE Annual Conference and Exposition in Atlanta witnessed a record turnout of student chapter/academic members, with more than 90 students in attendance representing 15 chapters. It was an excellent venue for student chapter members to meet, greet and learn about the aviation-related activities taking place at other schools. Representatives from each chapter gave a brief presentation May 15 at the student meeting. Students had the opportunity to participate in a number of sessions planned by the AAAE Academic Relations Committee that were designed to help them plan their futures in aviation. A career exploration panel made up of diverse members of the airport community led these sessions. Sessions also were available on interview skills to help the participants pursue an airport job, as well as on networking skills to make them more effective in communicating with participants at the conference and in their future relationships in the industry. Members were able to take part in an expanded airfield tour hosted by Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International. The “Mixer With the Mentors” was well attended and relied upon the participation of many of the aviation professionals at the conference. This session was organized by Academic Relations Committee member Dave Byers, C.M., assisted by committee members Jeff Gray, A.A.E., and Scott McMahon, A.A.E. Forty delegates volunteered as mentors and shared their experiences and expertise with the students to give them a good overall picture of the aviation profession, as well as the variety of opportunities present in this field. They introduced their mentees to friends and associates in the exhibit hall and at various sessions. The work of committee members and mentors on this program is appreciated as an important element

in the introduction of students to the airport profession. Student delegates were joined by 17 high school students from the Atlanta area who are interested in learning more about career opportunities in aviation. The AAAE Academic Relations Committee plans to work with Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, host of the 2012 AAAE Annual Conference and Exposition, and with future conference host airports for inclusion of an opportunity for high school students to participate in the program. We look forward to the continued growth of the student chapter/academic program and student participation in AAAE in the years to come. The new relationships formed between the student attendees and AAAE members will benefit all parties well into the future.




Top 10 U.S. Airports Serving U.S. Destinations Top 10 U.S. Airports Serving U.S. Destinations Based on Total Flights

SEPTEMBER 2009-2010-2011

September 2009-2010-2011







10000 Sep-09 Sep-10 Sep-11













© 2011 UBM Aviation Worldwide Limited. All Rights Reserved.

Top 10 U.S. Airports Serving International Destinations Top 10 U.S. Airports Serving International Destinations Based on Total Flights

SEPTEMBER 2009-2010-2011 7000








Sep-09 Sep-10 Sep-11





© 2011 UBM Aviation Worldwide Limited. All Rights Reserved.










Rapiscanoptimized Optimized Checkpoint rapiscan checkpoint

Checkpoints in in checkpointsdeveloped developed collaboration airports, to deliver: collaborationwith with airports, to deliver: • TSA Qualified Technology • TSA and ECAC Qualified Technology • EU Standard 1, Type C Approved • Efficient Screening Processes • Efficient Screening Processes • Lower Total Operating Costs • Lower Total Operating Costs Improved Passenger Experience •• Improved Passenger Experience

ToTo learn more or to schedule a demonstration, contact us at learn more or to schedule a demonstration, contact us at +44 (0) 870-7774301 (EMEA) or +1 310-978-1457 (Americas). +1 310-978-1457 (Americas) or +44 (0) 870-7774301 (EMEA). • •

one coMPanY – total SecuritY ONE COMPANY – TOTAL SECURITY




Construction Begins On KCI Intermodal BusinessCentre

assengers by airport TRAFFIC FOR JUNE 2011 Airport



% Change

Akron-Canton (Ohio) Airport




Austin (Texas)-Bergstrom International









Baltimore Washington International Bradley International (Conn.)


Daytona Beach International




Eastern Iowa Airport




Gerald R. Ford International (Mich.)


Houston Bush Intercontinental Kansas City (Mo.) International








+ 3.2

Lambert St. Louis International




Los Angeles International




Miami International




Myrtle Beach (S.C.) International




Nashville International




Port Columbus International




Quad City (Ill.) International




Raleigh-Durham (N.C.) Int’l




Rapid City (S.D.) Regional










Savannah (Ga.)/Hilton Head Int’l




Southwest Florida International




Wichita Mid-Continent Airport




Richmond (Va.) International Rockford (Ill.) International






Melbourne Airport To Add Maintenance Facility

Santa Barbara To Open New Terminal





Clarion Partners and Trammell Crow Co. have begun construction of the first building at the KCI Intermodal BusinessCentre. Blount International will occupy 349,440 square feet in LogisticsCentre I, a LEED Certified, Class A distribution center situated on 22.54 acres at Kansas City International Airport. Completion is scheduled for January 2012. KCI Intermodal BusinessCentre is an 800-acre master planned business park located on the KCI airport campus adjacent to the airfield. Phase I of the project comprises 182 acres that will support up to 1.8 million square feet of warehouse/distribution centers, traditional office/warehouses and light manufacturing facilities. Total construction of all phases will be approximately 5.4 million square feet and will include air cargo and air freight facilities adjoining two runways. The total value of the development at KCI Intermodal BusinessCentre is projected to exceed $216 million.

The Melbourne (Fla.) Airport Authority approved construction of a 33,750-squarefoot hangar that will house Executive Wings, a full-service turboprop maintenance facility, according to an announcement from the airport. Construction of the $2.77 million hangar is being financed by the airport and an $860,000 grant from the Florida DOT.









June July







The new, 72,000-square-foot Santa Barbara (Calif.) Airport terminal is nearing completion and was expected to become fully operational in August, airport officials said. The $63 million project includes the relocation and rehabilitation of the 1942 portion of the existing terminal, a new aircraft parking ramp, and a new shortterm parking lot and roadway. The new facility was designed and built with the goal of a Silver LEED rating.

Since the introduction of AAAE’s Interactive Employee Training (IET) system in 2000, airports have applauded its cost effectiveness and overall benefit to their internal training programs. More than 2 million training sessions have been completed by nearly 550,000 industry employees. Every airport has seen dramatic reductions in training costs and these costs continue to drop with each training session. The training message is consistent, the turnkey system is very user friendly, and the record-keeping is accurate and automatic. Join the 90 airports on the IET team today and realize the benefits of this patented training tool.

ADVERTISER’SINDEX ADVERTISER AAAE 2012 Annual Conference ASSA, Inc. Astronics DME Corp. Atkins Axis Communications Inc. Burns & McDonnell C. Kell-Smith & Associates, Inc. Delta Airport Consultants, Inc. Interactive Employee Training System (IET) Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Michael Baker Corp. Oshkosh Corp. Rapiscan Systems, Inc. Ricondo & Associates, Inc. RS&H Siemens Transportation Security Clearinghouse Whispertrack LLC.



WEBSITE PAGE 45 41 19 Inside Back Cover 39 Outside Back Cover 44 43 53 38 31 5 www. 51 35 Inside Front cover 47 21 www.whispertrack com 10-11

The $1.2B Maynard Holbrook Jackson International Terminal roadway system project at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport yielded more than 500 sheets of design drawings requiring detailed coordination with multiple stakeholders.

Engineering Construction Environmental Architecture

We’re bringing more to our projects. With deep roots in the communities in which we live and work, our success has been founded on truly understanding local requirements, practices, and stakeholder concerns. Now we are also able to bring best practices from project experience in the most vibrant markets in the world. And while we’re still your local consulting partner, we can draw upon the resources and technical capabilities that have made Atkins one of the largest international design and engineering consulting firms. We’re Atkins. What can we do for you today?


Keeping Commerce in Flight Innovation is intrinsic to success in aviation. Burns & McDonnell supplies innovative thinking to every segment of the business of aviation, from terminal upgrades to fueling systems, runway paving to high-tech facilities.

Airport Innovation for the Next Century C

For more information, contact: Randy D. Pope, PE 816-822-3231

9400 Ward Parkway Kansas City, MO 64114 816-333-9400

Engineering, architecture, construction, environmental and consulting solutions for the aviation industry Atlanta • Chicago • Dallas • Denver • Doha, Qatar • Fort Worth • Houston • Kansas City, Mo. • Minneapolis-St. Paul • New England • Orange County, Calif. • Phoenix • St. Louis Cha t t anooga, Te n n . • K n o x v i l l e , Te n n . • M i a m i • M i l waukee • N ew York • N orfol k-Ham pton Roads , Va. • O ’Fal l on, I l l . • O m aha, Ne b . Palm Beach G a rd e n s , F l a . • Ph i l a d e l p h i a • R a l e i g h , N .C. • San D i ego • San Franc i s c o • Sea ttl e • Was hi ngton, D .C. • W i c hi ta, Ka n .

Airport Magazine  

Airport Magazine's August/September 2011 issue, focusing on security

Airport Magazine  

Airport Magazine's August/September 2011 issue, focusing on security